>> rose: welcome to the program. we begin tonight with graham allison from the kennedy school at harvard. he's written a fascinating new book called "destined for war," in which he looks at the possibility for wars between a rising power-- that would be china-- and an established china, which would be the united states. so we talk to graham allison about that possibility. >> long before donald trump found his banner, xi jinping had announced, when he became president, in 2012, his objective was to make china great again. he calls it in his language the great rejuvenation of the great chinese people. in his story, and in the story for most chinese, china was the great country for 5,000 years. there was this to00-year intermission when the west came

and exploited them, but now china is growing up to be great and strong again so we want to be great again. >> rose: and we conclude with a conversation about graham windham, the world's oldest orphanage. >> in 2006, it celebrated 200 years of existence, and when you think about it it is the foster care kids, the new orphans in our society. so the institution ha has morphd and has evolved in helping thousands and thousands of kids in the foster care system. >> rose: graham allison and graham windham next. >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by the following:

>> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: graham allison is here. his latest book is called "destined for war: can america and china escape thucydide's trap?." what it examines is the potential for conflict as china threatens to displace america on the world stage. i'm pleased to have graham allison back at this table. welcome. >> thank you for having me. >> rose: when did you first decide that this was a subject that needed attention? >> well, it's probably a decade ago, henry kissinger, my old professor at harvard, and lee

kwan yu, about which i was writing a book which i published -- >> both have done interviews with you. >> and wonderful interviews. these i think are two the strategic leading lights of our lifetime. and each of them kept reminding me-- graham, you're interested in the soviet union, yes, you're interested in the nuclear weapons. china, think about china. i started studying china about 10 years ago. and about five years ago, i stumbled on this idea that the thucydide had a big idea, which was when a rising power threatens to replace a ruling power, in general, bad things happens. that aa lens, as henry says, helps you look through the daily noise and news, to see the-- a primary dynamic here, and that helps us recognize the dangers that are inherent in such a situation. >> rose: i mean,s it as timely as today. this is the "financial times"

from today, and it has a picture of xi jinping. "xi jinping, china's president, makes his way to the podium in the great hall of the people to deliver an hour-long speech that warned china's neighbors that the country would not tolerate any infringement of its territory." "warned that china would not tolerate any infringement of its territory." and it would define its territory. >> absolutely, and he was just coming from spending the weekend with the p.l.a. at their displays -- >> people's liberation army. >> they had a celebration of the ninth birthday of the peoplesy liberation army. and a bunch of military exercises in which the exercises were playing against the so-called blue team that was outfitted a lot like us. >> rose: so what do you, the chinese mind is about what they want to do? >> i think it's very clear. long before donald trump found

his banner, xi jinping had announced, when he became president in 2012, his objective was to make china great again. he calls it in his language, the great rejuvenation of the great chinese people. in his story and in the story for most chinese, chine afs the great country for 5,000 years. there was this 200-year intermission when the west came and exploited them. but now china is growing up to be big and strong again, so we want to be great again. >> rose: and they want to be great on their own terms, not great as part of the west creates. >> lee kwan yu had a line, china wants to be send as china, not as an honorary member of of the west. >> rose: what does that mean? there are people who would argue with you and lee kwan yu, and henry kissinger, that china does not have global ambition. >> well, i would say -- >> empeeleristic power. >> there are two points you have there, both fundamental points. so, first, with respect to its

ambition for the time being, i think it's right to say they would like to be the predominant power in the western pacific, which means not seeing the u.s. navy as the arbiter of incidents in the south china sea, determining who should build an island or who owns an island or otherwise. they look at that rather like teddy roosevelt looked at the caribbean. >> rose: the other people claim ago you said arbiter-- but other people claiming parts of the island is not the united states. it's their neighbors. >> we're not claiming, any but we're claiming we have a say in what's going on. when the british and germans wants to have a say in a territorial dispute in venezuela in 1903, teddy roosevelt said, "i have a good idea. you can have a war with us or butt out sm "n" our hemisphere, our thought was we should be the determinant of how these things are adjusted. and i think from their point of view, as a great china

historically, did not have some other great power there, helping to determrmine who owns an islad or who builds an island or what goes on. so i think your second point about imperialistic, the chinese imperialism-- and kissinger gets this exactly right-- is not of territorial occupation. they just want you to be tributary states who give deference and a respect -- >> in their region or beyond their region? >> i think in the first instance, their region is about as far as they can see. so it's things they can see initially. so, again, i think if-- i bet if xi jinping were articulating, he would say, for as far as we can say, say, up to the second centennial, which is 2049, we just want to be a great power in our region. we don't have ambitions to be in europe. we don't have ambitions to be in the western hemisphere. >> rose: you think that might change? >> well, the question is is if in 50 years i have now become

the predominant power in asia, will my horizon expand? maybe, maybe not. historically, china insisted on being ranked compared to everything it could see. but it couldn't see things that were very far away. and i don't think it has any territorial ambitions, but it does have ambitions to be great and to have others be deferential. >> rose: but it is throwing its weight around in a way because of how many-- the number of projects it has in pursuit of minerals, in pursuit of relationships in different continents around the world-- africa, latin america. the trade with latin america. >> absolutely. what's-- and what's as much of a string to the resources that it thinks are essential for its continued super economic growth, that are part of its building up... i think again historically, if alliment to do is secure my lines of communication and all i want to

do is secure my access to resources, that in the japanese case led ultimately to an engagement and basically fighting about that, and, indeed, basically an empeelerrizing. i don't think-- most of the chinese scholars i know don't see china developing a desire to want to occupy other people's countries. but they doment to have a say and to have a substantial say, and the closer it is to them, the more say they want. >> rose: how do you compare xi jinping to previous leaders? others of recent history? >> the-- i was in beijing just two, three weeks ago for the chinese i know-- i always try to ask them a question kind of like that and listen around the edges. clearly he is not like any other leader since mao, and even now people are saying well, he's-- they call him-- it's not like

the c.e.o. he's the c.o.e.-- the chief of everything. so he's got all the lines running to him. >> rose: including the military. >> everything, everything, the economy, the military. >> -- tao is not even a comparison for him. the only comparisons would go mao, and so he declared himself a core expleerd they may even elevate him another level at this party congress coming up in november. >> rose: one of my really wonderful conversations with li quang yu, he talked about when ping got interested in what he was doing in singapore and sent 200 chinese to go to singapore and observe and come back, so whatever revolution they were going to take on in china, they would know what he had done.

>> absolutely. i think why li kwan yu and can yet interviews did you with him were very helpful and so relevant for us, he felt himself to be half chinese, but he mostly cared about singapore and trying to make singaporeature vief. in order to do that, he had a real need to know what the hell was going on next door in china. and the chinese, starting with ping, saw here are chinese guys making a very successful society in singapore, how does this work? in one of your interviews, yu talked about the black box. it's like they have a trick. and yu said you have private property, macarthur economy, this is basically how it works. every one of these leaders, including xi jinping, called yu mentor. that meant he spent thousands of hours with these people talking face to face. when you ask what did xi jinping want? it's not me, some academic, coming up in a theory of the

case -- >> power, too. >> he did. >> rose: he understood power more than he understood democracy. >> oh, way more. in fact, there's a funny story. when i to know him when he initially became a fellow at the constitute of politics at harvard, he took a sabbatical, this was the late 60s. i kept seeing him in between. every time you would come away with 1,000 good idea. he called me up and said, "you know, i'm thinking i might send my son to be a student at the school." and i said, "well, you know, that would be great, but we have an admissions process." he said don't worry, he's a double first from cambridge, so he'll make it through the competition. he said, "i want you to take care of him. i want you to make sure he learns everything, everything. but do not have anybody talk to him about democracy." >> rose: yes. what's interesting, too, to me is how the chinese see the

united states. do they respect us? do they not respect us? do they look at the things we have accomplished, both in terms of our universities, in terms of our technology, in terms of the success of our economy? and do they say there's a lot to be admired and some things to be copied? >> they think of america as the superpower, america that showed how it could become such a successful society. they copy everything they can copy. they steal what they can steal. they emulate what they can emulate. but they don't think they want to become americans and they don't want they want to have our system-- at least for -- >> what is it about us that they don't think they want to be? because it was said after the collapse in 2008-- the economic collapse we had in 2008-- that the chinese said, "we've stopped trying to emulate you because we don't necessarily think you're doing it right." >> 2008 was a big event for them in the financial domain, where they thought, gee, wait a minute, capitalism, wall street,

you guys certainly know about financial markets. you must know some magic of financial markets. and when there was a collapse and we had to struggle, they came to conclude, maybe the teacher doesn't know the answer. so in their system, they believe that you have to have more control of everything. so xi jinping is not going to relax capital markets because he's afraid of what the consequences would be. they are not prepared even for their market economy not to have national champions, which the government supports. so every day, you pick up the paper, and you see, okay, here they are buying up and trying to build ships and semiconductors so they'll be able to compete in that. there was a time when, you know, germanyss of the place that built high-speed rail. well, they came to build some in china. they required them to chair the technology. they steal the rest.

now china builds the high-speed train. basically, they perfectly prepared to be predatory in learning from somebody that's been successful in every area. but when it gets to government and politics, they now and more and more as they watch the u.s. in the 21st century, they look and they say, "would anybody try to emulate that system, any sane person? we're about pragmatism, not ideology, democracy, we have pragmatism. we have what works. we're about having a system in which the leaders get to be leaders by being tested at many, many levels so we have a meritocracy. we're very happy with our system. we're not trying to sell it to you. we're not trying to tell other people what they should do, but we're telling you, we're not interested in your system for us." >> rose: and they're saying don't talk to us about human rights and freedom-- >> nobel peace winner dissident who is in a hospital and who is dying and we keep -- >> don't let them go and get

treatment. >> they're cruel. >> will he be the next premiere? >> that's a good question. i think betting-- i mean, everybody there is terrified watching to see what happens between now and november in the party congress where xi going to get his second-term lease, and-- and whether the standing committee, or puts nim a formal position. >> rose: as premiere. >> it's not clear. >> rose: he's also beyond the age normally they allow you to do that. >> but i think it's pretty important to break that age limit if xi jinping has any idea that he might like to break that age limit, you know, five years on and stay longer. >> rose: in preparing this book, "destined for war: can america and china escape thucydide's trap?," you looked at history, not just china and america. you looked at-- where had there

been this kind of rivalry in history? you looked at 16 cases. >> yes. and if you are picking the case that looks eerily similar, i have a chapter on the road to 1914 in worl world war i. so basically a rising germany, which after unification, when it was about half the size of britain, becomes equal to britain. i by 1900 a quarter bigger, by 1914, building a big navy. under this dangerous diej, an accident happens, basically, a serbian terrorist assassinates an arch duke in sarajevo and triggers. >> rose: that was the spark that started the war. >> absolutely. i have studied this case since i was in college, a long time ago. it's still unbelievable. the parties were not looking for a war with each other, anything like the war they had. so how in the world an arch duke, the emperor in austria and

hungary cared about. at the end of this war, everyone had lost when they cared most. he's gone, the empire's dissolved. the russian czar, he's trying to back the serbians. he was overthrown by the bolsheviks. kaiser is backing his buddy in vienna, he's been tossed out. france bled for a generation. if they were given a do-over, nobody would have chose whaen he did. >> rose: war likely to happen over some missed assumption, wrong assumption, or some trigger event that nobody expected. >> right. >> rose: and everybody rushes in. >> and that's the extreme danger. and today i would say the thing that sort of sounds the most dangerously like that is kim jong-un testing intercontinental ballistic missile. just what you said at the beginning. >> rose: let's talk about that. the president said, "i went to myrrh largo, i met with the chinese. i said to them, even though i

feel very passionately about trade and getting a fair deal for american workers and creating more jobs here, all i want is fair trade." that's what the president said. "i'm wlling not to make the case if you'll help me on north korea." then three or four months later he says they didn't help him at all. >> right. >> rose: in fact, rather than trying to encourage north korea to do the right thing and not do this, they didn't. and so the united states is put in a very, very difficult place. each time the north koreans make another test, they learn from it, whether it's successful or not. >> right. >> rose: and there is an inevitability about that. what does the united states do? >> unfortunately, what we're seeing is a cuban missile crise in slow motion, which is now speeding up. so in the months immediately in-- not long. not today, but in months-- donald trump's going to come to a fork in the road, just like kennedy did at the end of the missile crisis, where he's going to have to choose between

attacking north korea to prevent it doing further i.c.b.m. tests,or acquiescing north korea being able to attack west coast with nuclear weapons. and he told xi at the mar-a-largo summit, "i am no way going to have this crazy kim jong-un with the capability to attack san francisco or los angeles. forget aut it." >> rose: how do you think it's going to end up? >> well, i think the response to that, general mattis, secretary of defense mattis says-- that's the general consensus-- north korea attacks seoul, maybe kills a couple of hundred thousand people. >> rose: more. >> or maybe more. and we have to try to suppress that artig 'tilery, the rockets, to prevent them from killing millions of people, which we do, and we have the second korean war. and we should remember what happened in the first korean war. in the first korean war, north korea attacks south korea, almost pushed-- and took control

of the whole peninsula. americans came to the rescue at the last minute, pushed north korea back up -- >> harry truman. >> harry truman. and macarthur happened to be left over in japan, five years after world war ii. in any case, we push them back up the peninsula, thinking that the things would be over before christmas. out of blue come 300,000 chinese and another half million, push us right back, beat us down the peninsula to the place where the war started. so the chinese say, "look, we've settled the matter. there's not going to be a unified korea on our american military lie on our border. we're not doing it." you said, "but wait a minute. we're not starting this. it's this guy kim jong-un that's doing this." so i think this is going to be extremely painful playing out. trump has certainly made it plain that he-- he says-- he's not going to live with a kim jong-un who does some more tests and, therefore, is capable of

attacking us. but trump has said a lot of things and then seems to change his mind. so who knows? >> rose: would you advise him in this circumstance do not attack north korea, even if they have a nuclear weapon that can reach san francisco, say? what you should do is live with it in the way we have lived with other countries having nuclear weapons, even though we have great questions about the rationality of their leader? >> i am not 100% clear. i've been thinking what would i do. >> rose: right. >> i know for sure in 1994, i was assistant secretary at the pentagon. bill perry was the secretary of defense. ash carter was another assistant secretary. the pentagon unanimously was wanting to attack north korea then. >> rose: ash carter talks about that. >> this is when they were getting the first material to be able to have nuclear weapons. i think that was the right thing to do. but we understood at the time

that might trigger a second korean war and that would be horrific. and the south korean president thought, forget about it. under no circumstances attack this guy, whatever he's doing, because otherwise, what are the consequences for seoul. so i'm afraid we'll end up probably finding a way to try to live with this by a combination of deterrents. he's not going to attack us dliblly out of the blue without knowing-- he's committed suicide. but maybe something happens. >> rose: yeah, but as you know, he does have paranoia about the united states want wao attack him. >> right. >> rose: you saw the secretary of defense, general mattis, in the last couple of days say, look-- in a message, clearly for the north korean leadership-- "we have no interest in regime change. we have no interest in attacking you. we simply cannot live with the idea of you having nuclear weapons. please appreciate that." >> yeah. i mean, these are-- this is going a choice between the horrible and the catastrophic.

>> rose: here is the interesting thing about it. the chinese don't want the north koreans to have nuclear weapons. >> right. >> rose: they really wish they wouldn't. >> right. >> rose: why can't they find some way to help the united states by saying to the north koreans, "look, you know, we've been providing your fuel and coal and withouout us your whole country is going to go down the tubes without us." >> what you would-- let's imagine there were adult supervision in this situation-- there's not, but if there were. so charlie rose is going down sitting with xi jinping and trump saying, "guys, you're about to stumble into a war" -- >> i think this is a good idea. i'm ready. >> "you're about to stumble into a war that will be catastrophic for us, and then say 'boy, how dumb is this '? in so let's see what you can do

together to prevent this. fip squeak from dragging you into a war. china would want us to do some things we don't want to do, and they would have to do some things they don't want to do. they provide 90% of the oil which is a life line for kim jong-un. they say, if we were to cut off that oil, this guy is so crazy and erratic, he might attack glus is he crazy and erratic? look at what he has done, he believes -- >> he's crazy leak a fox. >> rose: he believes that nuclear weapons give him power-- not the power to attack, but the power to defend. >> to survive. >> rose: and to survive. and he looks atica davi, and people like that, who gave up their nuclear capability and say look what happened to gaddafi. >> i agree with you on this. the idea of him giving up his nuclear weapons which is our official position and has always been makes no sense.

this is pretense. there's no sense about that. the question is, given that he has nuclear weapons already, give than he can already attack south korea. he can already attack japan. how much extra does he buy for being able to attack us? i think not much. so maybe, i think if you could imagine americans and chinese doing something together sitting down saying, "wait a minute, this is going to stop now. and if it doesn't stop now, we're going to play an extremely hard hand." that hard hand all the aught to include china cutting off, by half, let's say, the oil. and if he does another test, altogether. but that would have to be jointly. the chinese are looking at us and saying, "i see. you're also building missile defenses in south korea. you have a lot of other designs here. you would actually like to have a military line on our order. and you want to keep us entangled in this so deeply

we're not worried about what you're doing." getting adult supervision or people -- >> back to yu, he said china would become the biggest player, the biggest player in the history of the world. that's how strong they're going to be, talking about 2050 or something like that. >> absolutely, absolutely. >> rose: 2050 is-- >> not that far away. >> rose: is 33 years away. >> yeah, but basically, most americans don't know, but it's a fact today china's economy is bigger than the u.s. economy by the single best yardstick from comparing national economies-- namely, purchasing power parity. so if you go to "the "wall street journal"" you won't read that -- >> per capita. >> per capita there's a huge difference and a very long time. but if you think about two competitors. since governance works about the way it's done for the last 20 years, and ours works. we grow about 2%.

they grow about 6%. look and see how that spreads. plus, as you say on the per-capita basis, they have four times as many people as we do. if they're only one-quarter productive as we are, they get to be as big as we are. >> rose: if you look at emerging nations what gives them power is the rise of a middle class that has huge consumer demand. and when there's huge consumer demand, that's a need for enterprises and businesses that can produce an economy that's growing faster than the established economy. >> absolutely. and they have a middle class that's bigger than our whole population. >> rose: exactly. 200 million, 300 million people. >> yeah. remember the funny kissinger line where basically at one stage, when he was out there open-- he was taken to an opera or one of the things in the evenings, some juggler, and he said, "wow, that's unbelievable. that must be one in a million. of the he said, "that means we only have 1,000 of them."

>> rose: yes. so you-- the areas that you have suggested could happen is taiwan. >> taiwan would have been extremely good-- the quote you gave today about sovereign territory. so basically, donald trump almost stepped into what would be the surest route to war-- that is, if taiwan is trying to be independent -- >> you mean what he said. >> that's right, what he said. trump in the transition had a phone call with the president of the taiwan in which he suggested, well, maybe if taiwan wants to be an independent country, maybe it should. and that's-- if the u.s. supported efforts of taiwan to become independent, i don't think any person believes, china won't fight the u.s. over that for sure. for sure. >> rose: that's a central principle for them. >> right. so when you get to other territories, well, what about hong kong? if you watch recently with the 20th anniversary of hong kong,

hong kong has been having some very strong impulses towards more rights for individuals. they don't like to have people telling them what websites can i go to? what i can read? and they even want to have more democracy. xi jinping said forget about it. so they're not going to have any space for hong kong. when you get to the question of the south china sea, there's a little bit more ambiguity. they claim this nine-dash line with all the features, whether that counts as their sovereign territory or not i think there is some ambiguity. >> rose: listen to this. here you have-- this is xi jinping where he's asserting the nation's sovereignty basically with the quote i read to you earlier. "we absolutely will not permit any person, any organization, any political party at any time in any form to separate any piece of china territory from china." i mean, that's a pretty clear lens. >> pretty clear.

>> rose: right below it the story u.s. to press china on trade. "the trump administration is playing trade measures to force beijing to crack down on intellectual property, theft, and ease requirements that american companies share advanced technologies to gain entry to the chinese market." >> well, this is-- thucydide would say this is the way dynamics normally works. basically, the rising power tries to take all the advantages it can, and in the chinese case, they have an artful balance their combination of intellectual property theft, their force ago because they have a huge market-- forcing companies to play by their rules, which include transferring technology. and then building up the competitor, excluding the external parties. if you look at apple or google, they can't operate in china. they even-- if china tells them, "you have to take the devices

off--" okay, yes. so basically -- >> that's what apple did. >> that's what apple did. and google did just a concession for their cloud i think yesterday, the day before. but every day this is going to continue -- >> that's how big the market is. >> because if you have the dominant market, people who want the growth will go to the growth area. and the ruling power, rightly, looks at this and says, "wait a minute. you're trying to take advantage of us in every way from sunday," which, yeah, that's what you're doing. i think you're going to see some push-back. >> rose: you suggest i think in the end to read and understand your book, the only thing that really can save us here is leadership. >> yes. and-- well, i would say the biggest question for both china and the u.s. is what happens inside their own borders? and i give a little thing at the conclusion of the book-- again, let's imagine this adult supervisor, just hypothetically. so she would say to both xi jinping and trump, "the biggest

question you have to solve is whether your society can govern itself." if you look at the american society, you would say you have a disfunctional democracy. and if it continues not to work, that's going to be decisive. and you would say to xi jinping, you're trying to retro a party dominated authoritarian system in a world in which people have smartphones, and as yu told you, that's an operating system that is not going to work in that environment. you're going to have to do some adaptations. so i think the big question over the next five years, 10 years, is going to be how does china manage its affairs? and how do we manage our aphrase? >> rose: i once asked yu who did he most admire? and he says pi, in g. that was the figure he most admired. >> another remarkable thing he said, i ask him about xi jinping, and he said, "this guy

is extremely impressive, extremely impressive." >> rose: he once said-- i'm not china expert, but he once said to me-- i said, "who should i meet in china that is reason for me to meet?" and he said xi jinping. >> he saw somebody that was a lot like him, but he said about xi jinping, one thing, this man has iron in his soul. look at his biography. he was a prince ling, and then came this crazy cultural revolution. they sent him off to the countryside. he almost died. his sister committed suicide. he thought of getting out of this world and then decided, "damn it all, i'm going to become redder than red and get my way to the top." i said who is he like? he said, "he's a little bit like nelson mandela." i said, "what?" that would be the most implausible thing. he said this is a man who is emotionally very secure, who has been through much trauma and is

determined to do whatever he gets to do. >> rose: and he's married to a general who happens to also be a singer. >> absolutely. and one of the brilliant strokes in president trump in his "art of the show" at the mar-a-largo summit that a lot of people missed. he had the daughter of ivanka come out and said,iment" to you meet my granddaughter." and she-- she's five years old-- she sang in mandarin-- in mandarin-- the song called "jazz man," which is a signature song of xi jinping's wife. so they thought they had come to hollywood or heaven. >> rose: congratulations. let me just finally ask you, dor between the u.s. and china? >> well, over what period? >> rose: between now and 2050. >> i would say the odds are much larger than anybody in washington imagines, much

larger. how large? i wouldn't make it-- not less than 25%. because i hope-- i mean, there's no reason to repeat historical mistakes. that says only those who refuse to study history are condemned to repeat it. so we can learn a lot of things from mistakes other people made, and there were special advantages in the current situation. if you had adults managing the two places, i think, you know, it's manageable. >> rose: but the title is "destined for war." >> it is, but at least it has a subtitle. "can we escape thucydide's trap?" >> rose: graham allison, thank you so much. >> thank you so much for having me. >> rose: we'll be right back. stay with us. >> rose: graham windham is one of the oldest orphanages in the country. the organization was established by eliza hamilton, the widow of alexander hamilton, in 1806.

it has expanded and now supports hundreds of at-risk children from the new york metropolitan area. graham windham has received renewed attention basis of the success of lin manuel miranda musical "hamilton." and joining me are jeffrey seller, producer of "hamilton" and louis a. miranda jr., the father of lin-manuel. i am pleased to have them here at this table. welcome. >> thank you. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: give me the history of graham windham. because it was the largest private orphanage. >> correct. and the fact was it has evolved. it merged. but in twu 6, it celebrated 200 years of existence. and when you think about it, it is foster care kids, the new orphans in our society. so the institution has morphed and has evolved in helping

thousands and thousands of kids iin the foster care system. >> rose: they basically place kids who can live with a family that takes care of foft ear they may not stay there for a long-term period? >> they do, and they work to get permanent homes. but they're different to the degree that they're making a commitment to that child or to that adolescent to be with them until they're 25, not just until they place them. but they will continue to work with them until they're young adults to make sure that their path to success is established. most of them just will let go with placement, with adoption. they will continue to work with these kids. >> rose: and eliza hamilton, alexander hamilton's widow, who lived long-- 90 or something? >> almost long enough to see

abraham lincoln walking down the streets of washington. >> rose: wow. that's amazing. that's amazing. >> yes. >> rose: what was it? 90 or 89? >> i don't remember, but certainly about 90 or so. >> rose: she had a long life. >> yes. >> rose: and she was involved how? >> you have to remember that half of her life she lived after the death of her husband. and she was integrally involved with raising the money for the washington monument. and as she sings at the end of the play, the orphanage may have been her crowning achievement. and in fact, what had happened, was she teamed up with mrs. graham of graham windham, who had started this idea in 18-- i'm sorry, in 1797, and then around 1806, they formed this orphanage, which was-- whose mission it was to help new

york city youth. >> rose: now, you two are being honored as what? >> as being good people, i guess. ( laughter ) we-- we-- we actually have gotten very much involved with the organization. jeffrey was this past year's honoree. >> rose: right. >> because there is a lot of relationships and programming that was born out of "hamilton" and graham windham. >> this is what happened. in the year before "hamilton" came to the world in 2015, they would have something like 67 annual donors or something like that. and the year after, it was up to 1300. so the beauty of all-- of all of the joyous, beautiful things that "hamilton" has brought into the world, one of them is elevating graham windham to a place in which it can expand its

budget, and it can provide services to more young people. >> rose: how did-- how did the success of "hamilton" make that possible? >> because no one knew that eliza's orphanage still existed. so this is what happened. it was december of 2014. we had not even opened yet at the public theater, but they were putting-- but it was already sold out, and they were already putting on new tickets. and graham windham sent out a tweet to our tweeter-in-chief, lin-manuel, and they said, "hey, thank you, lin. we're graham windham, and we are the successor organization." you know, "we are the organization eliza started." and lin did not know that and we did not know that. so suddenly, eliza's orphanage, everybody finds out -- >> so they want would be supportive. >> yeah. >> is active and going crazy right now. >> there are different programs that have been created in this

relationship from the eliza project, through broadway cares, money is given for the cast to work artistically with the kids that are being served by graham windham. and the latest technology project that they're putting in their school, they have a school since 1902 in westchesterfor 300 kids who live there. it's a k-12 school. someone from puerto rico called me and said, "hey, i'm going to see 'hamilton' -- >> i bet you got a lot of calls from puerto rico saying, "hey, i'm going to see 'hamilton'." >> he said i want to have breakfast with you. the guy happened to be the chief person for hewlett-packard, and said, we want to do something with you guys." and i said, "fund graham windham." and now, two years later,

$250,000 lab that hewlett-packard -- >> they built a $250,000 lab? >> yeah, in the school, the graham windham school in west cherrer for 300 kids being served by graham windham. it's all of these unintended good consequences of requested of "hamilton." >> rose: "hamilton" did a lot of good things for a lot of people. >> graham windham now has 17 full-time staff members whose mission it is is to nurture these teenage kids so that they can graduate high school successfully, graduate college successfully, and then start their careers in the working world and develop into independent, autonomous, productive adults. >> rose: a worthy project. >> it's a fantastic project. >> rose: so let's talk about "hamilton." no, no, i'm serious.

>> that show. >> rose: that show. are you in the position of the rest of your life going to be judged by what you do in contrast to "hamilton?" >> i had the joyous and transformational experience of producing "rent" when i was 31 years old. >> rose: which won every award you could win. >> which won every award you could win. which was written by the extraordinary author who sadly died on the eve of the first preview of "rent." and when i did "rent," people said, "i hope you're enjoying this because it's never going to happen again." and i-- and i smiled at that, and i said, "you're probably right. it's probably never going to happen again." but it didn't stop me from committing myself to this crazy endeavor they love, which is making new musicals and studying

new musicals and figuring out how to crack that code to make a great new musical. and "avenue new q" came after that, which won the tony award. and lin manuel miranda, and tommy kale came into my life and we made "in the heights" together which was a joyous experience, and then "hamilton" came which has absolutely been the biggest one of all. >> rose: by a wide margin. >> and what is so joyous about that is this notion that something comes into the world through the inspiration and artistic ingenuity of someone like lin, and it creates a need where we never knew we needed it before. and it creates a want where we never knew we wanted it before. and yet, it fills us with so many rich feelings, feelings of

aspiration, feelings of patriotism, feelings of camaraderie. and, of course, feelings of loss and of grief. >> rose: and it gave, as some of the actors said to me, it made them part of our history. >> oh, well it has-- it has been a game changer in "a," how we can educate young people. how we can inspire young people. and how lin and tommy and our creative team have create aid show that looks like america today so that young african americans, young latinos, young mexicans, young asian americans can look at that stage and say, "i'm part of the story." >> rose: exactly. >> "that's my story." >> rose: the american story. >> right. >> rose: as one of them said to me, you know, it made me feel like i was truly an american." >> yes.

maybe for the first time. >> rose: exactly, exact. how has it changed your life, louis? >> we always had a complicated life in politics for the most part, which is what i have -- >> mayor koch. >> most of my life. now i love being lin-manuel's dad. >> rose: do you. >> i love being lin-manuel's dad. and people stop me in the street-- the other day i was going to your office, and some lady screamed, "hey! hey! lin-manuel's dad!" she comes. she says, "you have to write a book about parenting. let me take a selfie with you." i'm like, okay. only 30 seconds. so it's definitely changed our lives for the better. and to use everything that "hamilton" and that everything that "hamiltons" that brought to do very good things-- the graham

windham, the "hamilton" education initiative. the many priceio sweep stakes that we do now that raise millions of dollars for institutions that we do it with openings. every time "hamilton" has an opening, we have a sweepstake to bring people to the opening -- >> an opening around the world. >> opening in the united states. >> rose: different cities. >> chicago, los angeles. >> rose: how many performances are there now? >> there are three "hamilton" companies running right now. one in san francisco, one in chicago, and one in new york. and within one year, there will be five when we add london to the mix and another ugz tour that will open in february of '18 in seattle. >> rose: and will stay in seattle or will tour? >> will work in seattle for about six weeks and then start touring across the great united states of america. >> and as we do that, we're doing the hamilton education initiative, where at the end of five years, we're going to bring

250,000 kids who are going to be paymenting in the curriculum that ends up seeing "hamilton" being at the theater and talking to the actors. >> rose: is there a movie coming out of this? >> there is no movie coming out of "hamilton" for a long time to come. we have plenty of time for that. >> rose: you would be cannibalizing the-- >> because we need to ensure that the indelible experience of seeing it on stage is the way to experience "hamilton." >> and lin-manuel says that all the time. it's what attracted us to broadway even before any of this happened. there's nothing like that live experience with actors that are doing this for you that night. there's no other experience like that. other than real life. >> that changes people's lives, that live experience. >> rose: being there. >> yes. >> rose: how does it change their lives? it gives them a sense of country

and a sense of diversity? >> i think-- this is hypothesis-- but i think "hamilton" has imbued americans who have seen it and/or listened to it with a sense of patriotism that i have never experienced in my 52 years living having grown up in detroit in the 70s, where when i think about it, my first memories as a child are my mother arguing with my grandmother over the vietnam war. watergate, nixon's resignation, stagflation of the 70s, and the decline of the auto industry in the 80s, plus, of course, the iran hostage cries. i don't remember any sense of patriotism growing up in this country. and, frankly, when i look at the 80s, and the reagan era, that was the wall street greed area. where was patriotism? >> what i hear a lot from my friends and acquaintances to go to see is that when they leave, the question that is in their

head, "what have i done with my life?" it makes you think about your own sense of accomplishment as a person when you see what this guy, who came from somewhere else, accomplished in a very short period of time in creating our nation. >> rose: how many kids have come through graham windham? >> oh, my god. i'm sure it's tens of thousands right now. >> hundreds of thousands. >> yeah. >> they're serving 4,500 kids every year right now. >> rose: and putting them on a path you hope to be enormously productive. >> yes. >> rose: so they can write "hamiltons" and-- >> that's a goal. >> and justices and entrepreneurs and doctors and nurses and teachers. >> rose: indeed. thank you, great to see you. >> wonderful to be here. >> thank you, thank you. >> rose: back in a moment. stay with us. finally this, on an upcoming

charlie rose we look at the new film "detroit." it is directed by katherine big low. it tells the story of the tragedy it the algiers motel in 1967. >> i assume this is about what went on at the motel? >> what happened at the motel? >> you don't know, i'll tell you. i was working security and on tuesday night we heard gunfire coming from the area near the algiers. police was there. there was a lot of shooting. when i went in there, three kids had been killed. >> no. so they were killed right before you got there.

phew. you carry a .38, right? >> a revolver. you carry a revolver. >> i do have a .38. >> you every shoot anyone? >> i didn't do it. please-- >> oh, here we go. >> here in detroit, a city of war, violence continues. >> we've made state police and national guardsmen available. >> i'm declaring a public state of emergency. >> it's a war zone out there. they're destroying the city. >> police! on the floor! >> i'm just going to assume you're all congressmans! congressman criminals. >> you don't talk about this to anyone ever, you understand? change is coming.

>> i told you what i saw. i'm trying to help here. >> change is coming. >> they're kids. what's the matter with you? >> change is coming. >> they're going to kill us, man. >> change is coming. >> i need you to survive the night. survive the night. survive the night. >> melvin, you want to go home? >> yup. >> what happened at the motel? >> the writer next to me, who-- whose work is extraordinary, came to me with a story set against the detroit riots, detroit uprising in 1967, a true story of a true crime set in the middle of it in the algiers motel. and it was, simply put, an execution. and a portrait of police brutality and racial injustice

that was extremely moving, very timely, and very topical. and about the same time that he told me this story, the decision not to indict the officer involved in the michael brown shooting had taken place. and so the-- i felt that this story needed to be told. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

>> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide.

captioning by vitac, underwritten by fireman's fund announcer: the following kqed production was produced in hi-definition. ♪ >> yes, "check, please!" people. >> it's all about licking your plate. >> the food is just fabulous. >> i should be in psychoanalysis for the amount of money i spend in restaurants. >> i had a horrible experience. >> i don't even think we were at the same restaurant. >> and everybody, i'm sure, saved room for those desserts.