if you want your book because it's a very interesting thought provoking and very timely read not only on the political battles and in the united states but more broadly on the ontological divide into a world when the forces of so-called progress and so-called tradition but before we dive into let me just that ask you where you find yourself in that battle each side you are on. i'm actually on the side of there not being a battle frankly i'm on the on the side of integrating the 2 worldviews i describe in the book and i think that a lot of the division we see in the united states and the division that we see across the world results from the separation of these 2 worldviews and ultimately the 2 parts of ourselves one of them is more rational you know in the head as we think of it and the other one is more intuitive and that's where we experience culture and art and tradition and if for religious religious faith and those 2 i as

i say in the book became separated around the time of the enlightenment in europe and that was that led to the division that we've seen in the united states ever since and i think across the western world at least now you know did you write this book i assume you were you had just strive toward some sort of academic neutrality or analytical neutrality but i know that even in your career experience here you have associated yourself with the democratic party before your work for 2 $1012.00 campaign of president obama would it be fair to say that that campaign was the last . all school politics the way we knew it i mean the rambunctious loud nasty but ultimately civil was that the last election that played out according to those rules yes i think that's a good observation and i think that's one of the reasons why 2016 caught so many

people including many people like me by which i mean you know moderate liberals to moderate conservatives. by surprise was we didn't realize how radically the world was changing and that to a large extent many americans and again i think we've seen this in other countries as well we're actually rejecting the tradition of civil debate that underlies democracy and we're willing to essentially cast all that aside. and what exactly do you mean by that because many people would argue that it is those. more directly liberal and conservative forces that you mentioned that strive to impose that worldview quite a leap to their worldview onto everybody else. yeah i just i just discuss the latest angle of this in some depth and i think that it's fair to describe the people that were referencing here you know we could call them enlightenment small l liberals there in the tradition of enlightenment liberalism which kind of includes

moderate conservatives people who believe in the enlightenment legacy of reason and democracy and i think it's a fair charge to say that a leader has them has been a problem especially since world war 2 with the enormous boom in prosperity in the west which has has created a global elite i think it's fair to say 'd that that is a problem but i only think i think that's only really a small part of what we're saying here and it's not really elitists for versus populists which is one way this gets framed especially trump is and that's definitely a big dimension of it but i believe it's only a part of it i think the larger story is the story of the split between the enlightenment worldview and the counter enlightment world view that i describe in the book absolutely let's talk about that more because you you frame it in terms of . governments based on reason and that's what you're calling life men and allegiance to religion tradition national identity of business something that you

train as counter and mutton and this is such a blood boiling issue for me because i think the american politics of recent years has produced so many well educated leaders who pelagic allegiance to reason and who have made so many terrible bloody inhumane decisions state obama's policy in libya i mean in terms of human suffering the sheer. blot it produced i don't begin even asked in may be the death toll of it just yet just because somebody has read voltaire i'm on just your i don't know like john locke should be automatically assumed that he or she is in lightened. there's a problem with the word in like no chorus because it makes it sound like you're either in like nor you're living in you know darkness and ignorance and that's not really the way that word should be taken although you know some people do take it that way it really should be taken as more embracing the shift towards reason as

the ultimate source of authority and meaning that happened around the time of voltaire and the rest in the 18th century. versus wanting to preserve faith and tradition and national identity and the rest. i think that it greatly simplifies both current world affairs and human history to identify the stuffing in libya with one person with with barack obama well i handed him out of a provides you know endless examples of terrible mistakes to terrible cruelties leading to genocides and there are multiple causes of those problems and i will defend barack obama to the grave he's he's one of the finest people i've ever in but i mean every decision i made a life they live for her and have this conversation for the time being because you clearly identify a present obama with my comment and many people do you still but mr christie with

all due respect one doesn't need to go to harvard it's you understand that forcibly into being in a tribal society is bound to produce no good i'm talking about of almost legacy not only in libya but also in syria in yemen etc and you know that tang's of social and actor paul ajah go research about this is not the rocket science even though bomb of ministration was indeed so in light of as it believed itself to be a show they have consulted some of it should they have for been able to foresee some of those consequences disastrous consequences not only for the specific countries but for several continents. well you know i'm not sure we want to disappear into the weeds of libya in particular but since you raise that topic that's a i think a fairly clear example of the division that i'm talking about so on the one hand you have a leader very much in enlightment tradition barack obama and then you have warmer

gadhafi who you know was a terrible tyrant representing the worst of the counter enlightment now my argument in the book is not you know counter lightman bad enlightment good or vice versa my argument the book is we actually need both ways of thinking and if we try to split them it creates terrible problems on the enlightment side if we become too radically enlightment oriented and we divorce ourselves from our souls for example as is one way to summarize this then you can have this cold hearted. hater ship of reason like we saw under stalin or mao for example where it's all perfectly logical and yet it results in terrible human suffering on the other hand if we go completely countering lightman then we end up with people like out of hitler where you have this romantic national mythology of the greatness of the german people and

that justifies exterminating jews and gypsies and homosexuals etc so that's those are the worst case examples and i agree with you that some of the mistakes made in . us foreign policy including very serious mistakes like in vietnam or in iraq were largely the result of people being way too much in the enlightment mode and assuming that rationality could deal with what were essentially ethnic tribal conflicts as you describe them on the other hand though on the counter in lightman side some of the world's worst dictatorships and greatest examples of corruption are enabled by overly being overly focused on the counter like men and discarding the rational ability to be skeptical and critique what you're seeing it's. those 2 this is what we saw under trump you as a very counter lightman figure and enormously corrupt well plays it as a political as he sees on that because he may have been enormously corrupt i don't know about i mean it sound documents supporting that are yet to be produced like

a lawsuits etc but one of these days and this are actually against his own country for his area which is where we were i mean if that's again this is just rhetoric i haven't seen a single american actually try for insurrection so let's let's wait for your course to deliver that judgment i think that's how the american system works well they're undergoing trial right repetition let me ask you about foreign policy because the ultimate in life men value is human life that's what in life and was ultimately all about and for all his britishness trump hasn't studied it and you war he hasn't killed as many people as the policies of barack obama have killed just based on that what you say that he's policy trumps policy it may have been less and lied to but more humane. oh heavens no.

but there are a lot of data if you believe in numbers if you believe the rationale you have to ultimately look at the figure is not in your you know and motional attachment to your political form of political employers well 1st of all i'd have to accept your premise that barack obama is solely responsible for the suffering while they were the president i mean he is you know an idea and this requires a setting this again requires a setting aside more armor gadhafi is one of the worst tyrants in history so what they have based on john it is saying it's in terms of is it doesn't go in the invade it got bombed the country and destroyed to get the government however bad it maybe again i think if we if we want to go back and forth about which major power has invaded which countries in the pursuit of foreign policy objectives i think we could spend the rest of the interview talking as i am asking you a simple question if you believe in in the valleys of enlightenment human life is the ultimate value and yet he found these parameter a little trumps policies foreign policies i'm not talking about he's the mastic

polls because you know about an expert on that but john's foreign policy is killed far far less people than obama's policies generally foreign policy is that if you want indeed you bring cut in like mend them contradicting together what wasn't difficult about well for example if you know just in terms of sheer human suffering and death trump was perfectly happy with the disaster in yemen and doing nothing to a president you know i originated with obama's policies you remember that yemen was given all over to the saudis because president obama made a calculation that the reigning track was more important for him there is again there are these terrible compromises and deals that have to be made around the world and in the united states we try to base our foreign policy on morality that certainly doesn't mean we always get it right or that we even have the ability to achieve the objectives we would like to see i think the stark contrast between. rama and trump is that obama actually was trying to do the right thing and trump

was only serving him self so his foreign policy amounted to whatever western jonell charles donald trump family the best and obama's foreign policy was an attempt whether one agrees with what he did or not it was doing his best to serve the interests of the united states and ultimately the world trump only serves trump trump is a classic foggo crat but mr kristol isn't isn't that a bit delimits of. enlightenment as the americans or as you personally understand it you they should. he talked about intentions and nobody in foreign policy cares about intentions if you. kill my baby or you know my family member al of good intentions i will still hate you i mean like what i care what people in those countries care about is not you know with intentions which tend to leave me to tend to pave the road to how but the rather be the outcome of policies when we talk about them like meant to be really assess based on their policy results rather than

policy intentions. i think they both matter and again we can argue all day long about results and we could go through the history of your own country and you could go through the history of united states of great britain in many countries and we can find things that went wrong that went terribly wrong we can even find examples of deliberate corruption but the enlightenment legacy as i say in patriots of 2 nations has its very very good aspects and it's aspects that have gone very wrong through divorcing us from the counter in lightman tradition and my argument is not one is better than the other and we need to make a choice and i'm actually is if you choose one or the other you end up with terrible results the problem with if we go too far on the enlightment side as i say as we lose can we lose that connection to matters of the heart and the soul and tradition and culture but on the other hand if we just say well obviously that that's a mistake so let's just throw it over and choose the counter and lightman then by discarding reason you lose the enormous progress that we can trace directly to the

enlightment not just in technology and incredible economic prosperity that resulted directly from that through the industrial revolution and everything that followed but also freedom from superstition and bigotry and hatred based in ignorance and the inability to think in a useful way critically so as i say we need both of them and barack obama i think to a large extent one reason he was successful again i'm not saying everything you did was perfect although i will defend. his character as i say today yeah and that isn't just words however he in many ways united counter enlightment and enlightment traditions in his ability to connect with people on the heart level people of of all kinds and at the same time to be very rational and very thoughtful about what he was doing i actually think joe biden is another example of that. but as i say 'd the trouble with donald trump is that he exploits entirely the counter in lightman legacy he was much more successful than hillary clinton at appealing to people on

the level of culture and heart and national identity and all that sort of thing but as with demagogues throughout human history he exploited emotion especially dark emotions like fear and hatred and resentment to serve only his own interests not the interests of the nation at large i said quickly we have to take a short break now but we will be back in just a few moments. the

or tactics that can be used to get innocent people to confess to crimes they didn't commit i don't even think people in the us really get that the police are allowed to lie to you the person who falsely confessed actually came to believe the lie that they were told about their own behavior once a false confession a stake in the case is closed and nobody really can tell the difference between a good confession and one that isn't.

welcome back to worlds apart this creature they're all patriots of 2 nations why trump was inevitable and what happens next now mr critchley just as big of a fan of and live meant as you are but i'm also very keenly aware that. log us reason to have a tendency all being teen fascinated but themselves you know being too much and they have an out of touch with reality and i think the main difference actually between they mightn't values and the counter and vitamin values that came after them is that conjuring lightman allows a lot of space for environment values it appreciates it it sees its value but it also recognizes its limitations where it's the in like man philosophy the way you describe it in your book and the weights practiced by the american political class only recognizes itself isn't that part of the problem i agree with the critique

that it has become overly rational and we've created a class of technocrats and in many ways it's permeated american and i think many other western countries cultures that the default mode even though people still have hearts and souls the default mode of business and government tends to be. almost exclusively rationalist and leaves questions of morality and beauty and art and meaning to people in their private lives and i do think that's a problem but it's certainly not something i advocate for much of my work is focused on trying to get enlightenment people to think more broadly and realize they're only using part of the available bandwidth so to speak and that there's a much richer way of thinking that retains the commitment to reason and the value of actual facts and valid logic which are critical to democracy and tolerance and

progress and at the same time recognizes there are many things that are not rational that are still very important and it's it's alienating and dissociating to only choose reason and at the same time we have millennia of human history to see how terrible it can be if we only choose emotion and. again some very american way of using either or i mean i think no no i'm saying we're at a yoga sort of even in i'm sorry i'm sorry your accent of your choosing either or i'm i'm repeatedly arguing that we must not choose either or we might try to integrate both well you're a member of that well terence he is i think you would agree with me that he is a classic enlightenment figure and he is most famous for his praise i disapprove of what you say but i will defend to doubt your right you say did you personally define trumps right to the freedom of speech why he was taken off twitter permanently especially given that he has such

a huge follow ship and then many people who sympathize with him not necessarily for all the dark reasons that you mentioned before but also because on the rational level they see his national brand of politics as serving the interests of americans better or did you advocate a great he's ability to speak so yeah yeah so one of the things and this will be i'll be going into this in more detail in my next book is that i think we in america at least need to be able to we need to regain the ability to think morally with more clarity we tend to be uncomfortable thinking about morality because we want to preserve religious inclusion and tolerance and not dictate moral codes to people but what do i think that is what i think it really let me finish let me finish please i think i'll dictate moral cause because most of the people hearing and we have primarily international audience. all that america all america does is

dictating its moral code to the world no i grant you i grant you we advance the values of democracy around the world and sometimes we do come across as dictating to people but the point that i'm making internally is that in this and lightman tradition democratic values are held very high but we become uncomfortable when it comes to saying something is morally wrong about a president for example and i think we need to regain the ability to think clearly in the moral mode and donald trump has done things that are just that are not a matter of opinion at least if you believe in democracy if we accept that democracy is a fundamental. value of the democratic values are fundamental to american way of life you've got adult and natural 5 peony and i that i know well you see some part of the problem with the of the exclusive focus on the counter in lightman mode is it makes everything a matter of opinion everything becomes subjective this is this is one of the distinctions between enlightment thinking and counter lightman is objectivity

versus objectivity now again the extremes are not good so pure objectivity is not a good idea is it miss and either is better a subject i mean what i found mr secretary is you get trump and we have and now we can say that you know because a lot of people voted for him that means that we vote on what's right or wrong but attempting to overthrow your own democratic government is just wrong in that they are going on thanks for that you believe in the american system you believe in institutions has he been sentenced for that that's he saw has happened and you know the other part of the problem with trump and this sort of pose is infinite innocence and we're expected to treat somebody like him as if they're an infant with no responsibility for their actions we saw this happen on television and when we get into these extremes of subject subjectivity you can get people to agree that they didn't see what they just saw on television mr cranleigh it become as if because nightmare world rule of law system one of the best and it will. of the

american courts and of course this is one of the legacies that the whole world and as you know on so if indeed what you say strew i'm sure that americans justice would pursue him and sentence him it is he's facing he's facing multiple criminal and civil cases and yet know that i don't care is not you're not i am not a judge and i'm not passing the verdict i'm exercising my free speech rights as a commentator to say this is what i am and then getting the truth do you think have without him being sentenced do you think and would you support he's right to exercise he's breach he's freedom of speech as a commentator without him being a sentence for any insurrection or you know betrayal of his country or whatever i absolutely defend his free speech rights and just like every other right under our constitution it's not unlimited the famous example is that you're not allowed to stand up and yell fire in a crowded movie theater that is out on there are going by the by the american war right and that's right and you're not allowed you're not allowed to call on people

to stage a violent overthrow the government now this is a matter of adjudication right now you're not allowed to counsel people on how to design bombs and where to place them these are a lot of fun for me and another. nothing i'm not allowed to lie when you're negotiating a contract for example there are all kinds of limits reasonable limits on and free speech on moral limits i would say so of course donald trump has free speech rights but it doesn't mean there are no limits and among the freedoms in our system is the freedom of choice of privately owned companies or excuse me or in fact publicly on companies like twitter to declining to host somebody on their service now i'm personally not that happy that social media companies have as much control over communication as they do but the fact is they are private corporations the do have the right to choose not to host somebody on their service and i think you know trump has been communicating dangerous lives on those services that. done enormous

damage so i certainly sympathize with their with the conundrum they face now apart from communicating to so-called lies that you mentioned he also has brought a lot of new ideas into the american politics and earlier this month the biden administration has issued its interim national security strategic guidelines which broke many of trogs ideas fair trade and going to for a war is making them eric and middle class the main stakeholder of american policies i mean chance influence there is very apparent because no and the one before he might you lay to those ideas so vividly does agree with that well i think the immigration and in national level let me give you no vision of trump was the innovation of trump essential he was to try to make it ok to run america as a thug ocracy well i'm not interested about trump i'm not asking about that trial he is well you just turns out trump innovations ation do you think if i get the

biden administration has taken many of these ideas many of the ideas that he publicly complained on is that a communications ploy on its part or it has trumped indeed succeeded in changing the priorities of the american enlightened class. now biden has spent much of his 1st 50 days days undoing the enormous damage done by president trump for example reversing the incredible death rate one of the worst per capita death rates in the world from the coded pandemic i mean this is an example of just the incredible 50 for oil your own car underneath a sounds of thousands is what i guess is what i mean by dangerous lies i mean literally leading to the unnecessary deaths of hundreds of thousands of americans because he refused to engage with a pandemic and instead was actually spreading lies about how it's not necessary to wear masks or do social distancing or how you might inject yourself with bleach or try hydrochloric when in all these insane ideas i mean there are literally hundreds

of thousands of americans who are dead who would not be dead were it not for president trump's dishonesty and irresponsibility 7 president biden has completely turned that around and suddenly we're getting to these enormous numbers of vaccinations and there was no way we were anywhere close to this kind of performance before president biden came along on the international stage president biden in many ways is trying to restore our seriously damaged reputation and repair our alliances and go back to a foreign policy that's more consultative instead of bullying and i think you know there's there's very little influence from president trump any of the things that he's done like trying to disengage from foreign words president obama was trying to do the same things he was often criticized for doing too much disengagement well mr christian i have many more questions for you but that our time is up so unfortunately we have to leave it there thank you very much for being with us my pleasure outside and thank you and thank you for watching hope to syria again next

week on what is a part. of . so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have it's crazy. let it be an arms race. spearing dramatic development only loosely i'm going to resist i don't see how that strategy will be successful very critical time to sit down and talk.

this is credible. soon they need to actually physically hold it out of the ground he would have well well well well well well well. there's a lot of money with the oil and with that comes. a lot of a lot of people from all over the country. you don't make a $100000.00 a year. as a minimum there's an issue. here maybe. they were told $60.00 a day hard work well work is not easy work and so they want to relieve their stress of how do they relieve their stress these and then move that out like these men that comfort these men that. people have been murdered up here people can raise their massive drug issues up here give

a boom you have everything else that comes along with money. in the stores to shape the way in care not to be deputy head of the admits that out . are critical flaws in the blocks vaccine strategy a problem made worse as a group of european states suspending the use of the senate could jab over reports of significant side effects meanwhile britain should stand for brand new code that emergency hospitals built to the cost of a half a $1000000000.00 pounds the same time as public anger grows over a mere one percent pay rise for frontline health workers the most is that equates to around $3.00 outs of 2 weeks and in many hospitals sites across the costs more. to go to work a particular car i'm.