the great delusion liberal dreams and international realities it's a real bombshell. cross knocking the great delusion liberal dreams and international realities i'm joined by my guest here in moscow mark slaughter he's an international affairs and security analyst we also have dmitri bobbitt she's a political analyst we spoke nick international and we have wendy's and he is a professor at the higher school of economics as well as arthur of the decay of western civilization and resurgence of russia origin across the rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciate it ok glenn let me go to you first here i'm really big fan of your summer's work he is a realist what does that mean. all in political theory to me to me in theory is the political realist i believe. will have to explain how states behave this see this essential being dependent on external situations so there's no good state or

about state everyone based on the international distribution of power so this contrast with the liberal theory in which we look more at the internal characteristics of state so whether or not there are democratic if they're if they have economic if they're interdependency if the humans rise to seriousness a human right. such you have these two theories which compete against each other to explain how the world works when you show americans as liberal hegemony and he says it's doomed to fail mark you know this is this is in many ways maritimers magnum opus of what is now been several decades of his fear of critique of u.s. foreign policy basically since the end of the cold war and how it has emerged not only as as the hedge in modern terms of power but has. i would say selectively use that power to try to reshape the world in its own image rather than say

the more real this notion of balancing power centers and trying to present another head to mine from emerging regionally it has delved into in ideology of exceptionalism which which mirrors heimer identifies as just another type of of nationalism and he also specifically addresses the way that the liberals have not only you know dominated you know the foreign policy in in terms of action but the inner circle such that there is a real it's no longer even really accepted now in the discourse it's something that's taught in universities and mediately rejected in favor of you know liberalism and it's. funny to see it on the other hand the neocon have exhibited this whole liberal approach to international relations as mentioned i mean it sounds nice and warm and fuzzy yeah we you know if you have the power why not try

to support human rights if you have the power and how fair trading relationships but it never works out that way mearsheimer would argue that makes things even worse because these end up being wars of choice. well i think there. is very soft spoken he stays more or less in the fray you meet him but he would be a medically correct language i mean he germany yes well i think that what he calls governing you know this is from my review of the book by the american conservative . you know. they called it a dead pointed at the heart of america's god when in feel all syfy progressive for liberalism well i think that you should call a spade a spade progressive liberalism what all to liberalism as i call it now it's not even a governing philosophy and states it's the parent. ideology which determines not only the state's action but which determines education. arts

sports and of course foreign policy and of course military so when for example a writes about the united states or visit the states militaristic behavior is almost certain to end up threatening its own liberal values liberalism abroad leads to illiberal ism at pool and of court well it's not just the liberals you know put in people like chelsea manning in jail for life you know organize an award why cheney's for for edward snowden this is not the liberals here this is the ideology that mearsheimer is criticizing promotes for example. the war in syria and promotes the legal regime change in in ukraine in two thousand and fourteen because if you look at the liberal gemini in it's really surprising to me that you when you get into an argument with

a counter position to the things i just mentioned they all have this defacto default position of i mean even liberal person because i'm not going to project my values i mean they can't even they're not even self aware of that ok go ahead right now there's nothing democracy human rights these are all good things but they have to be based on power foundations otherwise this is essentially from the realist mind at least what drives international politics now mark mentioned that the realists to some extent been purged out of the discipline from after the cold war and this there were systemic incentives for this of course because during the cold war it made sense to look at things through this bottles of power however if you would still follow this theory after the cold war then you would have to see the west was now overwhelmingly powerful the soviet union didn't exist anymore if we didn't follow this through then the logic. suggest we should start to pull back and essentially dismantle nato which is what the section of people like commercial

armor walt walt and others have argued however this is to make incentives for liberals because they said no actually we create peace by expanding that because we're promoting democracy we're promoting human rights. we should actually go and topple governments around the world because that's the good of promoting democracy so i also mentioned the some nice idea that soon if you go out and promote democracy as a form of security because democracies apparently go don't go to war with each other then not everyone benefits but at the end of the you see that it essentially undermines and the. itself in science or in the sympathy for anyone else because they get and we're going to look at this little issue and no one can look at that here's why american foreign policy since the end of the cold war it is just been a trail of tears for the people that are on the receiving end of it mark democracies don't go to war with each other except when they do have a u.s. attack on serbia. no i don't agree that the pursuit of democracy and human rights in international relations is any way

a good thing. but it might not but i think what glenn is saying i mean if that if that can be attained ok without use of violence i mean that no and i think that sure i should do so defending and promoting ideas it's the actions to promote what martha are saying is that i've got a problem first of all it's obviously to vittie and hypocrisy you know the u.s. is biggest allies of the middle east are the powerful liberal democracies of saudi arabia qatar and bahrain and. the united arab emirates so the us supplies you know i think their successive liberal for regimes of liberal foreign policy the u.s. arms over seventy percent of the world's dictatorships according to u.s. researchers and they're trying to cut russia out of the remaining two. thirty five percent that russia and china share among them so you know it's it's really a case of liberal foreign policy is an exercise in

a park or see it's weaponized liberalism as as a basically a means of demonizing propaganda for my enemies and for my dictator friends well we all see the press coverage that mahatma been solved in any sense that it's really interesting because it really is a p.r. trap because even if it feels like iraq afghanistan syria what's going on. it's still your intentions were good ok and that's why no one loses their job and cable t.v. in the us with the first time that lofty ideas lead to the more stable results in fact that there was two wars in the life of humanity but not for years i mean the wars which destroyed europe in the early the beginning of the nineteenth century that were all formally spread ian republican values sending lied to them and to end human use them and even weiss people like kind of the famous german boy it even

they kind of good clued into this into this trap basically i just love these this called from. impulse is deeply wired into the liberal democracies you specially their elites and of called well this is something that a lot of muslims don't understand when the western democracies came to them with arms where promise of war beginning from the ninety s. the initial thought the crusaders are back with their christian ideas not the crusaders but what with christian ideas with something much worse with something very very deep gauged from christianity from tradition something something you talk and something terrible demon hits on exactly which is i could get the problem with islam the pharmacy of liberalism it's. universalism whether you are talking liberalism today christianity at one time communism at another time if we all know

the verse the list goes again the crusading impulse the desire to force other people to leave your. view will save you no good life to save them that is what is so terrible about a liberal foreign policy and we are simon even says although he contradicts himself later that he prefers a liberal style of government instead of hope and hope but in the anarchic world of international politics with no world government competing power centers it is a recipe for militarism and imperialism and disaster and a loss of rights at home i would just push back on the one thing mark mentioned and i think a marsh i would agree with me. let's say that you have a you know human rights democracy but if it's found founded on power then it will be fine for example after the cold war let's say we would have created a greater europe based on what a bunch of common european home so everyone becomes part of the same club and we

agree on certainly here humanitarian standards or you know democratic freedoms will go to your well some good no. matter how we're not instead we've developed it may have been just useful you know for example if we so slowly and it became it became an instrument of power suspension and now we can expand and using democracy as a reason so i get very much a new civilizing mission so the new white man's burden is to go out and bring democracy to the poor of the other of the rest of the world and what hold that thought we're going to go to a short break and after that show a break we'll continue our discussion on john mearsheimer new book stay with r.t. . prosecution will need to become almost. a full design. where you

push aside the threat of fines. by the number one place you do i mean yeah i'm yasmeen political pressure on the only main conclusion earthworm security jenison knows where the phone bundled up business models used by american corporations dad is sold on could be mental disease as you use. the solution. in association with the potato. i knew going he saw as it is just simply deleting to an investigative documentary. ghost war on oxy. seemed wrong. but all were all just all. to me. yet to

shape out these days to come to advocate and engagement because betrayal. when so many find themselves worlds apart. just to look for common ground. zia's says harlan kentucky. well you see you could very easily. a co money city with the most know coal mines left. the jobs are gone all the promos of. these people are survivors of a world disappearing before their eyes. i remember thinking when i was younger that if anything ever happened to the coal mines here and there it would become

a ghost town but i never thought in a million years i would see that end it's how it's happened. welcome back across like we're all things considered i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're discussing john mearsheimer new book. let me go back to glenn here was getting a bit heated there and everyone's trying to grab space here to continue your point my friend well i was just going to make the point that according to this new liberal theory and liberal ideology there's less scope for compromise because if you have if this realistic you know you can always agree that you should have a balance and you can reach a compromise but for the liberals if you think that you know spreading your empire your liberal empire will bring perpetual peace then any compromise with the other

serious ascension of peace meant and so instead you have this incentive to pursue a perpetual war in order to achieve perpetual peace and i think that's what makes them so dangerous that you can't you can't compromise you can't negotiate this essentially goes against the whole idea that we can actually reach this point where the world becomes this peaceful democratic utopia us. so. i guess that's my main bit of the sort and that's the fascinating point because compromise means evil you can't compromise with with evil with evil with with with well with certain tanks we cannot provide us with saudi arabia just not russia and china. will explain that ok if it's simply because saudi arabia other countries go to our border and long ago geo politically aligned themselves with us foreign policy interests it's it's not the principle that matters when you're considering whether to ally yourself with illegal countries whether you're considering saudi arabia or russia or china or you

know any turkey or any number of countries it's not principle that actually determines it it's just rank hypocrisy it's a it's a lie they tell and believe themselves to be really that's why you know these things that it was really about don't just because realism describes the real world and liberalism describes made up world and a made up set of conditions of human nature real ism and elaborates on this you know real ism views the world that we are all social animals that we are born into a culture a society and we naturally interact with each other liberalism views that we are all this atomized in the vidual who fink about and sign social contracts with each other and this. eroni assumptions about human nature at the fault of liberalism to be

a theory for foreign policy in the world real world and that fill your two to act the real world in real human nature leads to the disaster of consequences war inevitable violence and tensions that arise with a liberal foreign policy. mark raised an important issue why did the united states and the world ally. themselves with saudi arabia this is the question that award of russian establishment leaders a lot of russian leaders are asking if saudi arabia can be an ally why can't we you know the answer i think is the following saudi arabia will never be a truly independent sovereign state with their elite with the kind of morals that they have their you know it's not a state of family they will always depend in the same way the united states could allied with the mileage china in the seventy's but it cannot allow itself with more or less normal china or to be. so basically what happens is their. russian

elite will have to make a choice you know they wanted to have good relations with the united states they tried to accord with the united states for many years the whole idea was that if they want to give money if they want territory to develop all oil and gas we can do do it together why aren't you doing that well because these people don't want all your money they want to change you they want your soul they want your soul they want to change you profoundly and then that sounds you know when. you know that we do so and idea to make the wall safe for democracy there is all it is that the world is not safe first for other countries and then in the end it becomes unsafe for democracy too so when for example even some russian diplomats say we have no idea what differences with the united states or with the west know we do because the whole difference is methods george of can say that it was the most

important thing about ideology methods russia does not want to change are the countries more deal in them in its own image the united states wants and here i think gives that accident call from george w. bush exactly before the invasion of iraq how would george bush saw iraq and liberated iraq can show power freedom to transform that vital region by bringing hope and progress into the wives of millions america's interests and security and america's belief in liberty borscht lead in the same direction to a free and peaceful iraq and of course with isis with a lot of other things that are really of a lot of on it one of those occurrences here another famous but i think flawed a bit of francis fukuyama we still have this the last man in the end of history i mean people dismissed the book as they should but that's still kind of the g. net. code of liberalism we actually it was heralded by the liberal i know i thought

it was a. little teeth this is awful they're just really like. wrong lately mission of it's right he keeps revising it well he just made a lot of money off of the need in trashing his own book it but what that's one point here it's messianic is that when you have the missing link view of the world you can tweak it because it's perfect it's sacred it's a deity in a of itself and any doubting of it it collapsed completely go ahead that was kind of a beautiful theory for liberal lead to money because what it really said this last man and that history the thesis was that no all ideologies works also there was only one left that was liberal democracy and every country if they want to meddle in the world would have to embrace it and everyone would follow on the leadership as you try to emulate its model and again this is i think it's important to point a book out because it's been the foundation of this liberal delusion which points

to and i think therefore one of the main issues that emerged on looks at this is the western relationship with russia because this is probably been the most toxic of this liberal hedge amount to be because from a realist perspective every realist even ken and especially ken and george kennan that i see they recognize that if you expand the world's largest military alliance up to russia's borders russia will be very anxious it will start to push back and when it pushes back it's a mutual security best thing is to get a settlement in place and try to recognize ok let's not cross this border let's find a mutually beneficial solution but this liberal delusion what we're seeing is well we're just promoting democracy russia it's democracy it's afraid of them are they hate our values. and so by allowing russia to essentially balance us this is the biggest threat to peace and we have to. defeat them that's just the logic so they're that liberalism is this peaceful ideology or theory it's it's good

that you know this is so it is a little in her head you only if it's you couldn't you can recast it in in a different way the united states in its imperium they are post modernist when it comes internationally leighton's russia is a modernist ok because they believe in borders ok the west says they believe in the values ok with you and will and then the method is the method right it's ok this is really interesting let's talk about another book that dovetails on with this well there's a lot of love this stephen walt who is a political ally of john mayer's i remember his book came out of the same just after where the hell of good intentions america's foreign policy elite and the client of u.s. primacy and that he has previously cooperated with john mearsheimer on a piece critiquing the corrosive influence of israeli influence in

washington right now and they were pretty much exiled from the sea you know from after that because of its reception and. if you go on you tube you can find there's a video ad from harvard's belfer center the liberal world disorder reflects on grand strategy and not so great assumptions this is why marriage simer together discussing both of those model steroids on steroids right now you have a liberal voice to challenge them there as well i strongly suggest you watch that video and we have this zinger in there from walt liberal the gemini is a full employment strategy for the us as foreign policy elite and i think it's really great he also develops the idea what you're talking about how liberalism it actually rode the foundations of what a state. it's because the liberal elite their cosmopolitan nature they don't

believe in borders that you know their free flow of people of of of value spread across the world they don't actually care for the idea of a nation they're at the end that they opposed to it and because of that that this maritime or analyze is in his book he focuses on this trifecta and how they interact with each other real islam liberalism and national that's you got of that the thing is there's these little liberal. hema you don't have to know anything about culture you don't have to know anything about nations you don't know to know anything about foreign languages nothing and nothing because you your values are your guiding light ok and you were absolutely right and you must defeat the heathen and convert everyone using the sword of innocence inside every black brown and yellow person in that little white liberal consumer just waiting to be freed with

the good ole truth when your largest pair of you go to school with the ninety s. as a translator for a wall street correspondent here she said that the first thing she heard from her boss us when she went to moscow she asked if she had to learn russian they said let's not make it a language club very soon all the world will be speaking english you know what we what i what i'm afraid off in this libero hegemony is one of the it is it is it's a tendency to have a monopoly and tendency to have a government intervention because this is exactly what michelle writes in his books he basically defend it he basically divides liberals seem to the so-called more dose revenge. you know from the times over the ones that have nothing against and the so-called progressive liberals who say that a government action is required to promote positive rights meaning gender rights all these things that we know about so. this is what this is the way to was to

thirty tearing is when basically you have a monopoly in there and you end up having monopolies in economy all these transnational companies you know high tech companies you have a monopoly in science which is detrimental to science and basically you have government interfering everywhere. going out of everything you just said. when it ends up being in toto is intolerance exactly what it becomes and monopoly gentlemen that's all the time we have here many thanks my guest here in moscow and thanks to our viewers for watching us here argue see you next time and remember.

the best out of georgia. the high says it's a pain to perform i actually prepare myself to. heed what. has most of. you. in a home. town that was. this country. so. what. was it you could with. yes get more education education.

ah. max kaiser financial survival guide stacey let's learn a south fill out let's say on the troika any earthly greece banks have to fight wall street spot thank you for something. on the story that's true. that's slavery. but whole existence to. put themselves on the line. to get accepted or rejected. so when you want to be president. or some want. to going to be press that's what i'm up for three of them or ten people that i'm interested always

in the warnings about our. guests. cranking gave americans a lot of new job opportunities i needed to come up here to make some money like me twenty five thousand dollars as a teacher or i could make fifty thousand dollars a year trucks or chose to drive a truck people rush to a small town in north dakota was among the employment rate of zero percent like gold rush is very very similar to a gold rush but this beautiful story ended with pollution and the bus station a lot of people have left here i don't know too many people here anymore slow down too much the last jobs that laid off the american dream is changing that's not what it used to be. and it's a tough reality to deal. and

acts of terror that's how the mayor of new york describes a series of bomb scares involving suspicious packages sent to bill and hillary clinton barack obama on c.n.n. former secretary of state hillary clinton has responded america's living in a divisive time. it is a troubling time. and it's a time of. deep.