1
00:00:00,060 --> 00:00:03,600
Hello, everybody. Welcome to our very first seminar of the year.

2
00:00:03,850 --> 00:00:05,580
That's our director is here with us.

3
00:00:06,060 --> 00:00:14,160
But normally, we don't always have seminars the week zero, but we are very lucky to have Rob House visiting Oxford just for the day.

4
00:00:14,160 --> 00:00:17,640
So we thought, let's have a conversation. Very informal one indeed.

5
00:00:18,210 --> 00:00:22,860
And I think it's I don't need to introduce Rob.

6
00:00:22,860 --> 00:00:27,060
He has spoken in this room quite a few times.

7
00:00:29,070 --> 00:00:38,340
But let me just simply say that it's particularly interesting and thrilling to have a conversation about the current predicament with Rob,

8
00:00:38,940 --> 00:00:45,690
who has really two sides to his, you know, understanding of the world and approach to the world as on one hand,

9
00:00:45,690 --> 00:00:51,239
a political philosopher and on the other hand, a trade law professor at NYU.

10
00:00:51,240 --> 00:00:54,899
And in his work, he either goes in one or the other.

11
00:00:54,900 --> 00:01:01,080
His last book on the US Trust is a fascinating read if if anyone hasn't read it in in this room.

12
00:01:01,560 --> 00:01:08,670
But he has also written huge amounts of books, textbooks and articles on trade law and and indeed,

13
00:01:08,670 --> 00:01:13,590
when we met and ended up doing this book, the federal Vision Together 15 years ago just came out.

14
00:01:15,300 --> 00:01:21,060
It's time to do another. I know it's time to do another new edition says, Are you going to help us?

15
00:01:22,290 --> 00:01:31,679
And so I think what what one of the things that brought us together were both very interested in the very big picture and in the small,

16
00:01:31,680 --> 00:01:36,270
tiny little details. And that's the in between or something like that.

17
00:01:37,230 --> 00:01:48,420
But in any case, Rob also is very involved in advocacy and on the blogosphere and on the Twitter fear sphere.

18
00:01:48,810 --> 00:01:57,870
And some of you, you know, if you haven't before now, I would encourage you to kind of go and see the stuff that he's blogged and posted,

19
00:01:58,650 --> 00:02:10,560
because if you want to follow in particular, you know, Trump and the global, as it were, it's wonderful to follow what he's writing.

20
00:02:11,100 --> 00:02:15,809
So today we thought because this is very informal, we just have a conversation.

21
00:02:15,810 --> 00:02:18,930
We will start talking, the two of us, and then open it up.

22
00:02:20,880 --> 00:02:24,810
That is that good? Yeah, that's good. Good. And of course.

23
00:02:26,640 --> 00:02:28,980
Yeah, we want to hear what you all have to say.

24
00:02:29,850 --> 00:02:38,910
And the way we thought we would conduct the conversation is to start with kind of Rob's view of the big picture, as it were.

25
00:02:39,090 --> 00:02:41,610
How did we get here? Trump and Brexit, you know,

26
00:02:41,610 --> 00:02:51,180
the people and the elites and all of these big questions and then move on to specifically assessing the Trump agenda, maybe a bit about Brexit.

27
00:02:51,390 --> 00:02:52,200
We'll open it up.

28
00:02:53,190 --> 00:03:03,419
So Rob, can you tell me and tell us a bit more about why you told me earlier that you think there is a lot of mythology in the air these days,

29
00:03:03,420 --> 00:03:07,350
a lot of myths that you're very good at debunking myths.

30
00:03:07,350 --> 00:03:20,790
So tell us a bit more about how you debunk myth. So, you know, Hegel famously wrote that the owl of Minerva only rises after the sun sets.

31
00:03:21,030 --> 00:03:38,280
But the practice today is for intellectuals to write the philosophy of history in and the amount of time it takes to make a a cup of Nespresso coffee.

32
00:03:39,120 --> 00:03:41,969
And I think that's a dangerous tendency.

33
00:03:41,970 --> 00:03:51,660
So clearly there have been surprising and disturbing and destabilising big political events that have occurred over the last year.

34
00:03:51,660 --> 00:03:57,389
And we're going to be conversing about those events in the next hour or so.

35
00:03:57,390 --> 00:04:16,379
But it seems to me that already there has been a rush to produce these instant philosophies of history or historical myths surrounding these events.

36
00:04:16,380 --> 00:04:27,150
And some of the myths that I think are likely to impede a more careful understanding and response are,

37
00:04:27,870 --> 00:04:33,059
for example, that what's happened in 2016, Trump and so on.

38
00:04:33,060 --> 00:04:39,300
Brexit is about populism, the people versus the elites.

39
00:04:40,860 --> 00:04:54,710
If you look at the numbers of you will see that, you know, there is no clear majority or even plurality of the population that,

40
00:04:54,720 --> 00:04:59,160
you know, in the United States that supports those positions.

41
00:04:59,770 --> 00:05:12,880
That are identified as of the new regressive, atavistic positions of the people versus the liberal cosmopolitanism of the elites.

42
00:05:12,910 --> 00:05:19,530
What has happened is that certain political entrepreneurs have, you know,

43
00:05:19,600 --> 00:05:30,820
realised that there are there is a section of the population to which mainstream politicians had not been appealing,

44
00:05:31,450 --> 00:05:41,110
whose views had not been given public expression and to some extent have been simply de-legitimize by mainstream politics.

45
00:05:41,530 --> 00:05:50,830
And what is disconcerting and disturbing in many ways to a lot of us, I think, understandably, is those views have been given a voice.

46
00:05:51,250 --> 00:06:00,129
But the views, I think, were there already, and it was a question of political entrepreneurs,

47
00:06:00,130 --> 00:06:08,830
of a certain kind coming along and and and providing a voice for them and protesting against those views,

48
00:06:08,830 --> 00:06:16,720
simply having been delegitimized or excluded from mainstream political discourse.

49
00:06:17,020 --> 00:06:19,809
So we're talking about a minority,

50
00:06:19,810 --> 00:06:30,850
but a minority that could be used to build some kind of new political coalition in the sense that it's a it's a group

51
00:06:30,850 --> 00:06:39,880
that sort of have been left out of the calculus of mainstream politicians and yet was not sufficiently motivated by,

52
00:06:40,810 --> 00:06:52,630
you know, racist, nationalist ADI, you know, cosmopolitan views as to be attracted to really extremist, you know, political movements.

53
00:06:53,080 --> 00:06:56,810
So they're not anti cosmopolitan. What are they anti-globalization?

54
00:06:56,830 --> 00:06:59,350
I mean, how would you characterise this?

55
00:07:00,400 --> 00:07:10,270
I think they're united by only the fact that their views have been kind of excluded as either politically incorrect or ignorant,

56
00:07:11,920 --> 00:07:15,490
you know, from mainstream political discourse.

57
00:07:15,880 --> 00:07:22,870
And so, you know, when people talk about populism as what's happening, in other words,

58
00:07:22,870 --> 00:07:33,820
that there is a position of the people that is in tension with the position represented by mainstream political elites.

59
00:07:34,220 --> 00:07:39,050
And that's another sense in which it's a myth that there is a position out there.

60
00:07:39,070 --> 00:07:51,790
There's a variety of positions that have cleverly been given some voice or legitimacy by by quite, quite clever political entrepreneurs.

61
00:07:51,790 --> 00:07:57,400
And I think that, you know, Trump is just not a clever political entrepreneur.

62
00:07:58,150 --> 00:08:03,879
What's most frightening is that he's a political entrepreneur who doesn't seem to

63
00:08:03,880 --> 00:08:13,780
have the intuitions or a kind of concentration and analytic ability to govern.

64
00:08:13,870 --> 00:08:22,350
But but, you know, it's you know, but in terms of political marketing, of finding a niche market.

65
00:08:22,380 --> 00:08:26,980
And he, I think, was extremely, extremely clever.

66
00:08:26,980 --> 00:08:31,630
But if you look at the number, if you look at both you look at public opinion polls,

67
00:08:31,990 --> 00:08:38,020
it's fairly clear that there hasn't been any kind of huge upsurge or even really

68
00:08:38,320 --> 00:08:45,010
significant upsurge in in in the kinds of views that that that seemed so,

69
00:08:45,280 --> 00:08:50,770
so disturbing. And to focus particularly on globalisation and adding globalisation.

70
00:08:52,270 --> 00:08:54,370
Another myth associates.

71
00:08:54,730 --> 00:09:07,420
And this again goes to the kind of artificial or mythic notion of populism as an outlook versus versus the views of, of, of elites.

72
00:09:07,960 --> 00:09:12,280
You know, that, that somehow, you know,

73
00:09:12,910 --> 00:09:21,610
the critique or rejection of globalisation is deeply connected also to the rejection of otherness of immigrants,

74
00:09:21,610 --> 00:09:25,840
of minorities, to forms of racism and xenophobia.

75
00:09:26,200 --> 00:09:31,180
And it's not at all true. I mean, if things had turned out somewhat different in the US election,

76
00:09:32,020 --> 00:09:37,980
it might have been that that Bernie Sanders would have been president and who has, you know,

77
00:09:38,050 --> 00:09:48,220
a different critique of globalisation which overlaps and its concerns about the effects of globalisation on inequality and are on,

78
00:09:49,060 --> 00:09:55,930
on you know on the working class are so and Sanders is.

79
00:09:57,190 --> 00:10:07,620
Policies on immigration were. In fact, more open and more cosmopolitan than those of Hillary Clinton who eventually won the nomination.

80
00:10:07,630 --> 00:10:19,890
So there's no natural alliance between the critique of globalisation on on grounds that it exacerbates inequality and

81
00:10:20,040 --> 00:10:31,830
and threatens the lives of working people on the one hand and xenophobic and anti-foreigner sentiment on the other.

82
00:10:32,010 --> 00:10:42,209
Certainly there are people who hold, you know, both sets of views, but there's no there's no necessity or inevitability to doing so.

83
00:10:42,210 --> 00:10:49,560
And I think if you look at the platform of Sanders, which had elements of economic nationalism,

84
00:10:49,560 --> 00:10:59,850
but in terms of human rights and and and and and people was a very cosmopolitan program.

85
00:10:59,850 --> 00:11:05,549
You could you could clearly you could clearly see that in Britain, we have the reverse.

86
00:11:05,550 --> 00:11:13,170
You know, we have those who are and especially on the Brexit side, those who are pro globalisation but anti free movement.

87
00:11:13,620 --> 00:11:19,860
Right. Know. So when you say the two views don't overlap, we have the you know, the Sanders reverse.

88
00:11:19,950 --> 00:11:27,899
Exactly. So there there there are a number of ways in which these views can combine and recombine.

89
00:11:27,900 --> 00:11:41,340
And and they've kind of recombined in a certain way, I think, due again to a certain form of political entrepreneurship.

90
00:11:41,340 --> 00:11:45,150
And and it is true that that, you know,

91
00:11:45,540 --> 00:11:59,070
there is something of an anti-elite story in that in that this kind of political entrepreneurship has exploited the fact that that, you know,

92
00:11:59,730 --> 00:12:07,830
the that certain political and economic elites have simply not been willing to face and answer,

93
00:12:08,890 --> 00:12:15,780
you know, certain of these views or constituencies in a very direct and serious way.

94
00:12:15,780 --> 00:12:18,839
They've tended, you know, to to dismiss them.

95
00:12:18,840 --> 00:12:26,310
But if we take, you know, GLOBE The Trans-Pacific Partnership, for example, it wasn't,

96
00:12:26,790 --> 00:12:32,189
you know, Trump and his supporters who brought down the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

97
00:12:32,190 --> 00:12:43,049
It was going down already. Hillary Clinton herself did not support it as a candidate.

98
00:12:43,050 --> 00:12:46,590
Some people said she was insincere and would simply reverse herself.

99
00:12:46,590 --> 00:12:55,319
But I think she was a shrewd enough politician to realise that that the her constituency, the, you know,

100
00:12:55,320 --> 00:13:08,820
the the the centre to centre left constituency was no longer pro this form of globalisation in any kind of, you know, kind of categorical way.

101
00:13:08,820 --> 00:13:16,430
And so there were good reasons for her believing that this sort of agreement would not be, would not be supportable.

102
00:13:16,440 --> 00:13:23,610
It's possible that had, you know, that if things had been different, you know,

103
00:13:23,610 --> 00:13:29,700
President Obama could have, you know, shoved it through a lame duck Congress.

104
00:13:29,700 --> 00:13:36,410
But even there, you know, probably he realised that he just didn't have the numbers to do it.

105
00:13:36,420 --> 00:13:46,860
It's also unclear whether in Canada TPP would have would have gone gone through and the the opposition to TB,

106
00:13:46,980 --> 00:13:52,500
TPP built up over a long period of time and and had to do,

107
00:13:52,740 --> 00:14:01,620
I think with a range of considerations that are related, for example, to the basic,

108
00:14:03,240 --> 00:14:09,450
you know, question of democratic legitimacy in international negotiations.

109
00:14:10,020 --> 00:14:15,270
These agreements were negotiated on the premise of of secrecy.

110
00:14:15,270 --> 00:14:18,270
The draft negotiating tactics were not released to the public.

111
00:14:19,290 --> 00:14:27,960
The constituencies who were able to get near the negotiating room and influence the negotiators were severely limited in,

112
00:14:28,920 --> 00:14:34,530
you know, especially in terms of those who could have influence on USTR.

113
00:14:34,950 --> 00:14:44,399
So many of the criticisms of of TPP from a democratic legitimacy point of view, you know, kind of cross-cut,

114
00:14:44,400 --> 00:14:51,480
whether on balance, you're a person who thinks globalisation is a good thing or or not a good thing.

115
00:14:51,720 --> 00:14:59,490
Can you give us your normative bias, Rob? Because I mean, just for everyone on process, Rob has written many, many years ago.

116
00:15:00,180 --> 00:15:03,270
The amicus brief in WTO for transparent.

117
00:15:04,080 --> 00:15:09,180
For transparency and the right for NGOs and nongovernmental organisation to contribute.

118
00:15:09,420 --> 00:15:13,410
All of that is long story, but also on substance.

119
00:15:13,440 --> 00:15:18,480
Our work together has had to do a lot with the when our trade deals legitimate

120
00:15:19,440 --> 00:15:23,910
and a call for global subsidiarity in particular and democratic government.

121
00:15:24,390 --> 00:15:32,430
So if you take your hat this time, not just analysing the politics of it and understanding why it was wobbly, but from your own viewpoint,

122
00:15:32,670 --> 00:15:39,659
whether it's transpacific or transatlantic or, you know, the kind of global deals we have these days or even the global deal and services anyway.

123
00:15:39,660 --> 00:15:42,990
What counts for the global governance of global trade?

124
00:15:44,070 --> 00:15:52,590
I mean, do you are we saying and we don't want to go forward too quickly to Trump, but in a way, to what extent normatively does Trump have a point?

125
00:15:53,970 --> 00:16:01,290
Well, you know, the and this, I think, goes to another dimension of the the populist myth, which is that,

126
00:16:01,290 --> 00:16:09,959
in fact, many experts and even mainstream economists have started to, you know, question whether,

127
00:16:09,960 --> 00:16:18,240
in fact, there have been, you know, solid gains from the point of view of workers or benefits to the economy,

128
00:16:18,600 --> 00:16:26,219
you know, as a whole from, you know, you know what I would call the post guy trade agreements.

129
00:16:26,220 --> 00:16:36,030
And these are agreements that go beyond removing tariffs and discriminatory border measures to forcing countries to, you know,

130
00:16:36,060 --> 00:16:45,240
give high level intellectual property protection to to limit the ways in which they regulate service industries and in some cases,

131
00:16:46,680 --> 00:17:01,110
to entitle foreign investors to sue the state if the state changes regulations in a way that's economically harmful to the investor.

132
00:17:01,500 --> 00:17:06,209
But, you know, there you know, the economic evidence that I'm talking now,

133
00:17:06,210 --> 00:17:14,040
mainstream economics has become much messier about the overall impact on the economy of trade agreements.

134
00:17:14,040 --> 00:17:23,939
And, you know, the message from mainstream economists ten, 15 years ago was, okay, yes, there is greater wage inequality and so on.

135
00:17:23,940 --> 00:17:27,239
But it's really and and and worker displacement.

136
00:17:27,240 --> 00:17:33,720
But it's really all to, you know, or fundamentally due to technology, it's not due to trade or globalisation.

137
00:17:34,170 --> 00:17:38,490
The more recent empirical work of, you know,

138
00:17:38,670 --> 00:17:48,270
tells us that both are involved and and that there may even be an interactive effect between, you know, the two.

139
00:17:49,050 --> 00:18:02,790
So it seems to me there's no longer the intellectual expert consensus in favour of doing globalisation through these kinds of these kinds of deals.

140
00:18:03,780 --> 00:18:09,329
And, and that's not something that, you know, so that's not something that Trump invented,

141
00:18:09,330 --> 00:18:15,120
it's something that, you know, his hardcore supporters invented.

142
00:18:15,120 --> 00:18:24,740
It's something that's been discussed widely and sophisticated policy for, you know, over, I would say, the last four or five years.

143
00:18:24,750 --> 00:18:31,170
But then Trump is the first one to articulate specifically what he thinks the consequences of this diagnosis would be,

144
00:18:31,350 --> 00:18:34,049
although I'm not sure his diagnosis is as subtle as that.

145
00:18:34,050 --> 00:18:40,050
Basically he says, okay, I want to keep jobs in the US fair and let's let's say we say, fair enough.

146
00:18:40,500 --> 00:18:46,829
Now what we've heard from Trump is that he will slam a tariff or a tax.

147
00:18:46,830 --> 00:18:55,650
It's not clear on the imports of companies who have exported their production in Mexico or elsewhere when they try to sell back their cars, boom.

148
00:18:55,800 --> 00:18:59,520
You know, there'll be a 35% tariff, he says. Just one example.

149
00:18:59,760 --> 00:19:02,159
So we're hearing these things.

150
00:19:02,160 --> 00:19:10,410
We understand, let's say we know, we take in everything you've said, but then mainstream economists have never dared to then go to that.

151
00:19:10,980 --> 00:19:18,000
They would have said, Yeah, we need to compensate for the better, for the, the unfair distribution of,

152
00:19:18,000 --> 00:19:27,930
of the gains from globalisation or we and etc. or maybe need to be more forceful on anti-dumping or but they would stay in the mainstream.

153
00:19:28,320 --> 00:19:36,299
So the question is, if not, you've kind of look pretty closely at what what Trump and his people are advocating, what they look like they'll be doing.

154
00:19:36,300 --> 00:19:40,500
And of course, Congress matters in this story. You know, what do you think?

155
00:19:40,500 --> 00:19:44,190
You know, as a public here, as we're following with what filter?

156
00:19:44,190 --> 00:19:48,809
How should we what what is completely what what is likely to happen?

157
00:19:48,810 --> 00:19:51,840
What are the obstacles? I mean, how do you see the equation there?

158
00:19:51,970 --> 00:19:57,840
Yeah, I mean, especially because every China, of course. So so, you know, one has to.

159
00:19:59,730 --> 00:20:04,020
I think often are separate.

160
00:20:04,500 --> 00:20:15,510
The specific policy threats that Trump makes, which I think are based upon a large a large ignorance of public policy and spend much of his life.

161
00:20:15,600 --> 00:20:19,770
This is an understatement studying or working in public policy.

162
00:20:19,780 --> 00:20:27,090
So what is the underlying theory behind what he's saying that if if if corporations

163
00:20:27,570 --> 00:20:35,700
and major U.S. corporations don't preserve jobs in America and reinvest in America,

164
00:20:37,050 --> 00:20:44,670
the federal government should make their lives difficult and and that is likely to affect their behaviour.

165
00:20:45,030 --> 00:20:57,960
Now that's a kind of, you know, form of industrial policy that often industrial policy scholars recognised as being conducted in,

166
00:20:58,300 --> 00:21:01,890
in Japan and other countries where, where, you know,

167
00:21:03,510 --> 00:21:12,510
the government tries to steer corporate behaviour based on, you know, based on sticks and sometimes carrots.

168
00:21:12,810 --> 00:21:21,990
And and so the idea of the tariff as a crude idea that as most people who who know something about these

169
00:21:21,990 --> 00:21:28,290
things would appreciate is likely to violate the US's commitments under international trade agreements,

170
00:21:28,290 --> 00:21:38,579
including the WTO. But, you know, he could equally say, okay, you know, if you if you send jobs offshore,

171
00:21:38,580 --> 00:21:45,240
well, we the government are not going to procure, you know, your products.

172
00:21:45,990 --> 00:21:51,840
You know, when when the government buys for itself or the Defence Department buys, you know, for itself.

173
00:21:51,840 --> 00:22:03,629
And, you know, and the and those kinds of like threats are used all the time by governments to, to affect corporate behaviour in many countries.

174
00:22:03,630 --> 00:22:13,530
And, and, or you know, if, you know, if you know, if you close your factory here, we will make sure that, you know,

175
00:22:13,530 --> 00:22:22,649
you are given the, the most onerous, you know, tax audit of any company in your in your, in your sector.

176
00:22:22,650 --> 00:22:30,120
And, and and if you want to do a merger or something like that, we will ensure that,

177
00:22:30,120 --> 00:22:34,979
you know, that it is triply reviewed by the Competition Authority, you know.

178
00:22:34,980 --> 00:22:45,510
So, I mean, his idea that we're going to use these kinds of threats against companies to get them to, you know, to reinvest in America.

179
00:22:45,510 --> 00:22:49,889
I don't think this is a a novel conception of how to do industrial policy.

180
00:22:49,890 --> 00:22:59,640
It drives neoclassical economists nuts because it seems to have nothing to do with the efficient allocation of productive resources.

181
00:22:59,640 --> 00:23:09,660
But but where you know, the the where the dramatic threat to globalisation seems to come in is where Trump says, oh,

182
00:23:09,660 --> 00:23:15,600
we're going to do this by slapping on these border tariffs or taxes because they're you either say,

183
00:23:15,600 --> 00:23:21,680
okay, we're going to break the law of the WTO or the law of the door renegotiate.

184
00:23:21,690 --> 00:23:31,320
And, you know, and and and, you know, that's a threat to in a way, to the global audience.

185
00:23:31,620 --> 00:23:40,259
But how how much is he concerned about doing it through through through these means that appear to be, you know,

186
00:23:40,260 --> 00:23:50,870
direct challenges to international trade commitments as opposed to using other sticks of carrots like, you know, distributing it.

187
00:23:50,900 --> 00:23:57,990
He's got a plan for a huge infrastructure program like distributing contracts under the imposition of program.

188
00:23:57,990 --> 00:24:02,850
You know, this, you know, yeah. Yeah. So, you know, it's hard to know at this point.

189
00:24:02,850 --> 00:24:12,990
It and I say that genuinely and as somebody who who who tries to like read almost every statement that comes out of the Trump,

190
00:24:13,230 --> 00:24:18,600
you know, trade team, which, of course, is supposed to not be what we're supposed to do because we're taking it too seriously.

191
00:24:19,170 --> 00:24:25,920
Well, I, I unfortunately make too much of my living working in this area, not, you know, not to do that.

192
00:24:25,940 --> 00:24:29,250
And, you know, it's all about history.

193
00:24:29,520 --> 00:24:33,570
Right. But one of the things that about, you know, that has happened, you know,

194
00:24:33,750 --> 00:24:39,659
to me since the election is and, you know, some people say I'm profiting from Trump being elected.

195
00:24:39,660 --> 00:24:48,510
Is that is that there's a tremendous demand from journalists to hear from, you know, you know, you know,

196
00:24:48,510 --> 00:24:58,020
academic experts about international trade, concerning the meaning of a number of these, you know, statements.

197
00:24:58,020 --> 00:25:01,410
So so. No one is talking virtually.

198
00:25:01,440 --> 00:25:04,230
This reminds me I'm supposed to talk to another one this afternoon.

199
00:25:04,530 --> 00:25:11,189
Well, you know, since the election, one has been talking, you know, several times a week to, you know, to journalism.

200
00:25:11,190 --> 00:25:16,709
And, you know, trade has become really something that's front page, front page news.

201
00:25:16,710 --> 00:25:19,530
But but often one simply has to say,

202
00:25:19,920 --> 00:25:31,319
I don't know that that different people who represent parts of Trump's transition team or the core group that's supposedly advising him on trade,

203
00:25:31,320 --> 00:25:40,559
his nominees for, you know, for U.S. trade representative, commerce secretary and so on, have said different different kinds of of things.

204
00:25:40,560 --> 00:25:43,020
And there's also, for example,

205
00:25:43,020 --> 00:25:58,409
a basic confusion between a critique of existing trade law that suggests that the U.S. is disadvantaged under existing trade law by in

206
00:25:58,410 --> 00:26:07,680
relation to countries that have VAT and taxes because of the way that the existing rules allow taxes to be adjusted south of the border.

207
00:26:07,680 --> 00:26:14,640
If you if you get more a lot of tax revenue from VAT rather than from corporate income tax,

208
00:26:15,840 --> 00:26:24,270
then then you have the advantage that you can that you waive VAT on exports, right.

209
00:26:24,270 --> 00:26:28,770
Because it's other countries, consumers that are consuming those products.

210
00:26:29,220 --> 00:26:35,400
And and then you impose or border adjust VAT on imports because it's your own consumer.

211
00:26:35,430 --> 00:26:39,420
So where where what's being taxed is the consumers?

212
00:26:40,470 --> 00:26:53,040
Then then you have this situation where you can impose the tax burden on imported products and relieve it on on exports.

213
00:26:53,040 --> 00:27:02,040
And some people in the Trump, you know, team have gotten it in their minds that there's something inherently unfair about that.

214
00:27:02,070 --> 00:27:08,940
Well, the answer, of course, is that the United States is free to adopt a value added tax if it wants and do it that way.

215
00:27:09,570 --> 00:27:18,209
But there's now a tax reform proposal in Congress that would try and kind of imitate or

216
00:27:18,210 --> 00:27:25,920
model the corporate income tax on this kind of destination principle by by taxing revenues,

217
00:27:26,550 --> 00:27:35,880
you know, based upon, you know, them flowing from sales in a particular territorial, you know, jurisdiction.

218
00:27:35,890 --> 00:27:46,170
So all of this is so that the income tax reform proposal and the border tax issue have then become confused with the way that

219
00:27:46,170 --> 00:27:54,239
Trump talks about a border tax as a way of punishing or threatening U.S. corporations that might be moving jobs offshore.

220
00:27:54,240 --> 00:27:58,340
And what he really means by that is not a border tax at all or a tax adjustment.

221
00:27:58,350 --> 00:28:06,850
It's really a tariff. But but I mean, what a border taxes versus a tariff is something he just has no conception of the difference.

222
00:28:06,880 --> 00:28:15,750
So on one hand, there is a package which is issues that have to do with a tax approach to creating incentives for corporations to stay at home.

223
00:28:16,140 --> 00:28:24,330
And that could be 80 or some revised corporate tax, as opposed to a separate kind of murky thing,

224
00:28:24,330 --> 00:28:30,780
which is like a new possible border tax that might greet the beginning of a trade war with China or others,

225
00:28:30,780 --> 00:28:36,570
because that would fall to WTO as opposed to whatever version of the first thing.

226
00:28:36,960 --> 00:28:45,260
Yeah, something like that. Right. So I think you talked about journalists coming to you and asking lots of questions.

227
00:28:45,270 --> 00:28:48,209
I think it's a good moment to to open up.

228
00:28:48,210 --> 00:28:55,610
And I don't mean to, you know, to descend the discussion into this level of technicality about international trade rules.

229
00:28:55,620 --> 00:29:02,549
I mean, we can talk. And I'm also very interested in continuing the conversation about the big picture and

230
00:29:02,550 --> 00:29:08,140
whether there is some kind of values shift and and also the connection with Brexit.

231
00:29:08,160 --> 00:29:10,380
Yeah, and that's what we should do.

232
00:29:10,530 --> 00:29:17,849
But I would say though, you know, there's so much talk out there at the end of globalisation or there anti-globalization.

233
00:29:17,850 --> 00:29:24,810
And you know, for me I missed what I was saying at the beginning and what we have in common is I think the devil is in the details.

234
00:29:24,840 --> 00:29:29,639
You know, if you don't start asking, well, you know, how do you question globalisation?

235
00:29:29,640 --> 00:29:34,350
How do you at least some aspects of it, at least the idea of footloose capital,

236
00:29:34,350 --> 00:29:41,100
where they go wherever they want and to the cheapest labour possible, you know, you need to go into these details.

237
00:29:41,100 --> 00:29:44,469
So I think for me that's very useful. It's not just technicalities.

238
00:29:44,470 --> 00:29:49,350
These details are highly political and they make real, you know, the slogans.

239
00:29:49,860 --> 00:29:57,420
And one small thing I wanted to say, though, on the Trans-Pacific, we're talking about progress and labour and exploitation of labour.

240
00:29:57,930 --> 00:30:05,140
We have had the. A guy from Vietnam who was the negotiator of the Trans Pacific from Vietnam.

241
00:30:05,590 --> 00:30:11,950
And he says that the U.S. really insisted that as a condition to being part of the

242
00:30:11,950 --> 00:30:18,370
Trans-Pacific Vietnam should introduce trade union rights for their workers in Vietnam.

243
00:30:18,640 --> 00:30:27,590
And they ended up accepting that. So this is where the question is no longer capital versus labour in the U.S. but, you know,

244
00:30:27,640 --> 00:30:32,860
in a way, labour versus labour in Vietnam versus the U.S., because now they're losing this.

245
00:30:33,220 --> 00:30:41,230
You know, the workers in Vietnam that were benefiting from this Trans-Pacific, you know, lifting up of their rights are going to lose that or not.

246
00:30:41,260 --> 00:30:46,089
I mean, I don't know if that's going to be reversed, but so I think when we're having this conversation,

247
00:30:46,090 --> 00:30:49,330
you know, there is the whole capital versus labour constrains,

248
00:30:49,810 --> 00:30:51,459
but there is also the, you know,

249
00:30:51,460 --> 00:31:00,910
the question of workers in other countries and how agreements can also sometimes make it harder to exploit workers, you know, elsewhere.

250
00:31:02,830 --> 00:31:06,940
So I'll just respond very briefly to this before we we open it up.

251
00:31:07,660 --> 00:31:22,629
So I think that the and the clearly the the provisions on labour that were put into the TPP and the supplementary provisions in the letter is,

252
00:31:22,630 --> 00:31:34,270
I think with Malaysia and maybe Vietnam or one or two other countries were there to try and get the the unions onside for TPP.

253
00:31:34,270 --> 00:31:38,649
But I can tell you from day one that that wasn't going to happen.

254
00:31:38,650 --> 00:31:45,220
That wasn't sufficient. And so what perhaps the most controversial aspect of TPP was,

255
00:31:45,460 --> 00:31:51,370
which existed other bilateral agreements, was this idea that foreign investors can sue governments,

256
00:31:51,370 --> 00:31:59,530
that they have a right to sue governments for the economic harm from governments changing public policies.

257
00:31:59,950 --> 00:32:11,950
And these decisions are decided by arbitrators who are like judges for hire, who do without the accountability of the judicial system.

258
00:32:12,400 --> 00:32:21,070
And so people said, okay, you have corporations who are able to use this unaccountable system of arbitration to sue governments,

259
00:32:21,280 --> 00:32:23,649
to sue countries on the one hand.

260
00:32:23,650 --> 00:32:32,980
But you look at the labour provisions and they don't give unions or civil society any rights to enforce the labour provisions in the TPP.

261
00:32:33,430 --> 00:32:37,509
So via symmetry between the, you know, the,

262
00:32:37,510 --> 00:32:43,299
the two sets of provisions and the kinds of rights that they provided labour on the one hand

263
00:32:43,300 --> 00:32:49,240
and capital on the other actually I think exacerbated a sense of the unfairness of the TPP.

264
00:32:49,240 --> 00:32:55,809
But, you know, and again here I think you're right club so to say we have to look at the actual

265
00:32:55,810 --> 00:33:01,090
content of these these agreements because my sense was and at one point when,

266
00:33:01,360 --> 00:33:05,829
you know, I was a Bernie Sanders person, but when Sanders lost the nomination,

267
00:33:05,830 --> 00:33:11,559
I wrote some pieces on, you know, how Hillary Clinton should do trade policy.

268
00:33:11,560 --> 00:33:21,520
And I suggested basically probably the TPP could be passed if you fix the cemetery between the labour provisions and the investor provisions.

269
00:33:22,810 --> 00:33:27,670
You know, if you ask most of the critics of TPP in the US what's wrong with it?

270
00:33:27,700 --> 00:33:34,179
Well, those who are really informed would say, well, there's too much protection of intellectual property.

271
00:33:34,180 --> 00:33:38,709
It will increase prices of drugs, there's too much, you know,

272
00:33:38,710 --> 00:33:46,030
discipline of the regulation of dangerous products like chemicals, too much for those industry lobbies.

273
00:33:46,030 --> 00:33:50,460
But most people would just point to investor state dispute settlement,

274
00:33:50,470 --> 00:33:59,380
this mechanism that gives corporations the right to sue investors, have they taken that out and and adjusted a few other provisions?

275
00:33:59,770 --> 00:34:07,329
You know, I think it could have it could have been it could have been a save that in particular,

276
00:34:07,330 --> 00:34:20,530
people like Senator Warren, who were, in a way, leaders of the movement in in the in the US legislature to stop TPP,

277
00:34:20,950 --> 00:34:27,999
you know, I think would have would have a lot of the steam would have been taken out of their criticism had the

278
00:34:28,000 --> 00:34:35,830
investment investor state dispute mechanism been removed or have there been a different kind of mechanism,

279
00:34:36,070 --> 00:34:46,110
more like a court, which is what is now being proposed in the set of the Canada EU agreement, thanks to in part to my dear old friend,

280
00:34:46,120 --> 00:34:54,669
our dear old friend Paul Maynard, who has been the, the Belgian hero in the story or villain, depending on your point, depending on your.

281
00:34:54,670 --> 00:34:57,670
And as you may know, he wrote that.

282
00:34:58,180 --> 00:35:02,770
Yes, you did. We corresponded on this. We did declare the classroom.

283
00:35:02,770 --> 00:35:06,850
The number two lay out the principles. And I helped draft that.

284
00:35:07,900 --> 00:35:12,070
And did you sign it? I didn't for a particular reason.

285
00:35:13,010 --> 00:35:16,749
It was you don't have to justify. It was less to do that with the content.

286
00:35:16,750 --> 00:35:21,610
But to do with some people I was advising about said at the time.

287
00:35:21,610 --> 00:35:26,380
But it would have. It would have been awkward for me to, you know, have have signed it.

288
00:35:28,090 --> 00:35:31,620
Brilliant. Let's open up a detailed question.

289
00:35:31,630 --> 00:35:36,580
Yes. A detailed question. And then. Well, you've you've had your hand up for a while, but you guys could fight it out,

290
00:35:36,580 --> 00:35:41,560
have it to two feet to hand up for its fellows directly on this point.

291
00:35:41,620 --> 00:35:49,810
Yeah, it does. It's around us. Okay, so then and then, as I have seen your act on the point about the TPP, the dispute mechanism,

292
00:35:51,220 --> 00:35:57,400
so you've got a process with governments in negotiating this process in relative secrecy.

293
00:35:58,780 --> 00:36:08,460
I think governments are agreeing to a system where governments can be sued by companies, by in the process itself.

294
00:36:10,570 --> 00:36:17,940
Who is the lobby? I mean, who put these clauses in account, this person.

295
00:36:17,980 --> 00:36:21,280
And this was the person to do this.

296
00:36:21,580 --> 00:36:29,640
Where did this? I've always wanted to see this story analysed why this set of clues is goes there in the first place.

297
00:36:29,650 --> 00:36:36,940
Who pushed for it? Well, there's a that's a long history, but that's this form of dispute settlement,

298
00:36:37,750 --> 00:36:45,670
you know, arose initially in the Cold War context, a context where, you know,

299
00:36:46,060 --> 00:36:49,240
there was an ideological divide east, west, north,

300
00:36:49,240 --> 00:36:58,750
south to try and de-politicize investment relations between countries that had different political, economic, social systems.

301
00:36:59,290 --> 00:37:05,140
And the idea was that, you know, that, you know, instead of, you know,

302
00:37:06,370 --> 00:37:15,130
one system imposing its approach on the other, you would have arbitration to decide these these disputes.

303
00:37:15,640 --> 00:37:26,160
And and in the first instance, almost the first years, almost all the disputes were developed country investors against developing countries,

304
00:37:26,170 --> 00:37:32,890
often countries where there was a, you know, rule of law and so or dictatorships.

305
00:37:33,820 --> 00:37:39,280
And then eventually it just expanded because there were a lot more disputes.

306
00:37:39,280 --> 00:37:45,939
And and when corporations realised that they had this, this form of remedy or recourse,

307
00:37:45,940 --> 00:37:51,040
when a venture went wrong, they and their lawyers started to use it more and more.

308
00:37:51,430 --> 00:38:00,610
And so it became part of the kind of official ideology of of neoliberal globalisation that if a country,

309
00:38:01,360 --> 00:38:10,959
especially a developing or transitional economy, wanted to incentivise investment, you you would need to sign that.

310
00:38:10,960 --> 00:38:17,140
They would need to sign this kind of treaty because it would encourage companies, foreign companies,

311
00:38:17,140 --> 00:38:23,200
to come in if they were protected in this way against political risks and the poor developing countries being weaker,

312
00:38:23,200 --> 00:38:27,160
they they had kind of no choice or else they would lose their investment.

313
00:38:28,100 --> 00:38:34,360
They felt they would. Yeah. And so now there have been numerous empirical studies of whether, in fact,

314
00:38:34,360 --> 00:38:43,390
there is a positive effect on investment flows of these agreements and thus whether developing countries are getting anything out of them.

315
00:38:43,780 --> 00:38:46,870
And the answer is that most of the studies say no.

316
00:38:46,880 --> 00:38:54,580
Very few suggest that there's any positive result in terms of increased investment.

317
00:38:54,590 --> 00:38:57,460
So it seems a bit like a scam actually. I mean,

318
00:38:57,760 --> 00:39:09,040
but you can understand why it started that that investor state arbitration was a way of trying to de-politicize or remove from Cold War politics or,

319
00:39:09,400 --> 00:39:13,479
you know, North-South political tensions, these kinds of disputes,

320
00:39:13,480 --> 00:39:18,190
and put them in the hands of a group of arbitrators who would sort of decide whether,

321
00:39:18,640 --> 00:39:27,940
you know, what what the developing country or the non-market economy was doing was sufficiently unfair that it it's

322
00:39:28,240 --> 00:39:34,990
destabilise the investors reasonable expectations when they entered that you know that political environment.

323
00:39:36,180 --> 00:39:45,610
But as a footnote because then the question is how does it then end up between Europe and the United States or the US and here?

324
00:39:45,610 --> 00:39:49,520
It's kind of an irony. I mean, I think there is a kind of cognitive inertia.

325
00:39:49,540 --> 00:39:54,880
We've had these clauses for 50 years with developing countries exploiting developing countries,

326
00:39:55,090 --> 00:40:03,130
constraining their rightly or wrongly and rightly originally and increasingly wrongly constraining their capacity to be governments, as it were.

327
00:40:04,120 --> 00:40:09,400
And then and then we have we import these constrain to us in Europe, in the West.

328
00:40:09,760 --> 00:40:14,709
And suddenly, of course, our public opinions are perhaps a bit more inert or whatever the reasons,

329
00:40:14,710 --> 00:40:17,770
the political sociology of it, which we can say a lot about.

330
00:40:18,190 --> 00:40:24,919
And so our public opinion say no, no things, but the developing countries, public opinion,

331
00:40:24,920 --> 00:40:29,829
it's not like they knew what was going on or they cared or they have when or whatever.

332
00:40:29,830 --> 00:40:32,110
They don't have the luxury to to care about this.

333
00:40:32,110 --> 00:40:42,370
But it's interesting there's still an interesting part of the story as to why in Europe specifically where government is legitimate to a great extent,

334
00:40:43,750 --> 00:40:49,720
somehow negotiators felt it was right to import these clauses that are so constraining for government.

335
00:40:50,080 --> 00:40:59,979
And in fact, there is a wonderful and I think very persuasive book that by Professor University College London Wild Group,

336
00:40:59,980 --> 00:41:03,400
how Paul's book workshopped this very room.

337
00:41:03,490 --> 00:41:09,070
Yeah. And who I think does a splendid job of trying to understand.

338
00:41:09,570 --> 00:41:13,649
This bandwagon effect in terms of bounded rationality.

339
00:41:13,650 --> 00:41:16,610
And I would really recommend that book because that, you know,

340
00:41:16,620 --> 00:41:22,589
tells the story and they can do it in a much more rigorous way than I'm trying to do now.

341
00:41:22,590 --> 00:41:27,420
And just a few a few phrases, but rather footnote on this.

342
00:41:27,870 --> 00:41:35,280
The footnote on this thing, you've been so patient, I don't know what to say just to stay with the topic.

343
00:41:35,700 --> 00:41:37,980
And then we get just this quick footnote.

344
00:41:37,990 --> 00:41:47,030
I mean, I very much share the direction of this of the document, in particular the points I was making at the end.

345
00:41:47,040 --> 00:41:57,000
I mean, I thought it was essentially just a way of foisting a kind of wider neoliberal agenda on the European economic and social model,

346
00:41:57,660 --> 00:42:05,460
which, for example, you know, that the rules of the clinical trials, the controlled drugs, everything would be passed fairly.

347
00:42:07,260 --> 00:42:12,930
Seriously the way that European countries are not used to the control of companies.

348
00:42:13,500 --> 00:42:19,979
But my footnote is that is that the figures of benefit that were conjured up could

349
00:42:19,980 --> 00:42:25,350
not be verified and it was all it would be criticised a lot in the last year since

350
00:42:25,350 --> 00:42:32,620
2000 means about economic vindictiveness you know the failure of economics overtaking

351
00:42:32,640 --> 00:42:38,340
so so they were claiming 1% or one half per cent growth in international trade,

352
00:42:38,340 --> 00:42:41,540
which would be multiplied into millions and billions of figures.

353
00:42:42,150 --> 00:42:44,190
This is what helped create the bandwagon I think,

354
00:42:44,200 --> 00:42:49,890
and when you actually challenged the people who advocated this, they just couldn't sustain where it came from.

355
00:42:50,550 --> 00:42:53,520
That go with. Right. Get rid of the experts.

356
00:42:53,970 --> 00:43:05,370
Well, I think the fact is that, you know, the you know, the economics profession itself has now become a lot more self-critical are elements of it.

357
00:43:05,820 --> 00:43:12,780
And and, you know, I'm very distinguish economists have you know, have basically,

358
00:43:13,260 --> 00:43:18,150
you know, indicated that there are these fundamental limits to these kinds of predictions.

359
00:43:18,540 --> 00:43:21,689
Danny Roderick is one of them. An economist.

360
00:43:21,690 --> 00:43:25,890
I admire a great deal. And you've been very patient.

361
00:43:25,900 --> 00:43:34,530
Oh, it's a bit of the reason I was just raising my hand at the beginning is that I could not move on from the bigger picture.

362
00:43:34,890 --> 00:43:42,330
Right. And it's still bleak for me because you said there's not one position and not a natural alliance.

363
00:43:42,330 --> 00:43:55,230
And and I could not understand the drive or the vehicle that this political enter for, nor should that embodied in Trump use.

364
00:43:55,620 --> 00:43:58,680
Because you say it's not populism. So what is it?

365
00:43:59,340 --> 00:44:08,040
Well, it you know, I think it's an application of business and marketing strategy to politics.

366
00:44:08,040 --> 00:44:11,130
And that's why I used the word entrepreneurship.

367
00:44:11,160 --> 00:44:18,750
So what was Trump's situation? He he was an outsider in the Republican Party.

368
00:44:18,760 --> 00:44:26,790
Yeah. And he was there in this contrast with a range of other candidates,

369
00:44:26,790 --> 00:44:35,070
not none of whom themselves was, you know, particularly compelling or able to build a consensus.

370
00:44:35,430 --> 00:44:41,549
So, you know, how how could he build the winning coalition?

371
00:44:41,550 --> 00:44:49,620
And it's like finding a product, finding a market, you know, that hasn't yet been exploited.

372
00:44:50,310 --> 00:45:04,139
You know, that's what it is. And and the market, you know, had only been exploited by, let's say, certain extreme fringe groups, you know,

373
00:45:04,140 --> 00:45:12,900
who were on the very edges of the Republican Party and who were unlikely to get access to,

374
00:45:13,350 --> 00:45:22,740
you know, funding and and to what one would call the party machine, you know.

375
00:45:23,520 --> 00:45:31,469
So Trump comes along, he can self-fund, which he did for the first part of his nomination contest.

376
00:45:31,470 --> 00:45:42,690
He basically so funds he he realises that that by saying something shocking he can be the top story in the news every day.

377
00:45:43,620 --> 00:45:51,779
And and he just realises that there are these folks out there who this market what I call a market who,

378
00:45:51,780 --> 00:46:01,110
you know, haven't really been brought into the the mainstream political picture.

379
00:46:01,770 --> 00:46:05,040
And and he promises to bring their voices in.

380
00:46:05,880 --> 00:46:16,230
And and, you know, they're as I say, there are other Republican politicians, fairly extreme people who wouldn't be willing to do that.

381
00:46:17,070 --> 00:46:25,550
But the price they would have paid was, you know, they would have then not had access to the party machine.

382
00:46:25,560 --> 00:46:31,080
And and so because Trump can self-fund, he doesn't need that access.

383
00:46:31,080 --> 00:46:34,799
And so he can build the coalition without, you know,

384
00:46:34,800 --> 00:46:45,570
the the threat that the party will shut him down as the Senate the same way as they would shut down some some extremists who are going to do so.

385
00:46:45,930 --> 00:46:56,340
And moreover, because the extremists really believe this stuff, they're you know, they're they're not very plausible coalition builders.

386
00:46:56,760 --> 00:47:06,360
So, you know, and Trump appeals to working class people to some extent who are xenophobic and anti-immigrant, but also want health insurance.

387
00:47:07,010 --> 00:47:10,610
And and are not necessarily particularly religious.

388
00:47:11,420 --> 00:47:19,549
The other is they're in the other kind of people who would empower the voices of these fringes.

389
00:47:19,550 --> 00:47:30,530
They would they would themselves be, you know, religious zealots or people who, you know, have a set of views.

390
00:47:30,680 --> 00:47:34,820
For example, they might be xenophobic but also want to get rid of health care.

391
00:47:35,270 --> 00:47:39,110
So it's clear what he wants. I mean, it's like he wants to keep Obamacare either.

392
00:47:39,230 --> 00:47:45,860
Well, you know, he's he's managed to communicate, I guess, you know, the details are hard to figure out.

393
00:47:45,860 --> 00:47:56,200
But what he has done is he's is because I think he's relatively free himself of any ideology except the ideology of the self-made man,

394
00:47:56,510 --> 00:48:03,590
you know, that kind of Ayn Rand type ideology. But he's relatively free of political ideology.

395
00:48:04,040 --> 00:48:07,790
He he can he can he can modulate the message.

396
00:48:08,060 --> 00:48:14,299
You know, he can send messages to different news constituencies and and, you know,

397
00:48:14,300 --> 00:48:20,270
and and be quite inconsistent in traditional terms of the Republican Party, you know.

398
00:48:20,570 --> 00:48:27,560
I mean, it was and then he becomes the only game in town because he can send these different messages in a way.

399
00:48:27,800 --> 00:48:35,870
He can appeal to different elements in the Republican Party on the extremes who otherwise were at war with themselves.

400
00:48:35,870 --> 00:48:44,779
And could not any one faction present a candidate who would who would, you know, command a you know,

401
00:48:44,780 --> 00:48:51,630
a large group of a large group of voters if he plan the strategy beforehand or make it as he goes.

402
00:48:51,830 --> 00:48:58,430
I think he made I think that that he probably made it a largely as he went along.

403
00:48:58,460 --> 00:49:08,510
My sense is that that he was unaware of the extent to which the Republican establishment would try and simply shut down his candidacy.

404
00:49:09,020 --> 00:49:17,479
And I think that he made he made it up, in a way, by just like a business, like an entrepreneur,

405
00:49:17,480 --> 00:49:26,960
by seeing how the market reacts to the statements he made and and and and what kind of support those were bringing in different,

406
00:49:27,380 --> 00:49:33,110
different communities. I think he would throw in statements to see whether he would gain a constituency.

407
00:49:33,110 --> 00:49:38,270
And then if a particular statement seemed to make him worse off, he'd walk it back.

408
00:49:38,300 --> 00:49:40,940
So it's like all these test balloons.

409
00:49:41,390 --> 00:49:48,860
So it's totally different than the Brexit because we think that there's this populist tide and the anxiety is tied.

410
00:49:48,900 --> 00:49:51,830
So it's yeah, I mean, that's that's a question.

411
00:49:51,840 --> 00:49:58,909
I mean, if I can expand on on on that, I mean, shall we be listening to you, you know, throw the baby with the bathwater?

412
00:49:58,910 --> 00:50:03,290
I mean, you know, I buy your argument. You know, it makes sense.

413
00:50:04,010 --> 00:50:09,089
Trump is not ideological. There's not this kind of huge populist wave.

414
00:50:09,090 --> 00:50:16,430
It's a number of people who want different things, as only a minority of them are, xenophobic, etc.

415
00:50:17,240 --> 00:50:19,700
Yes. On the other hand, and I'm in here,

416
00:50:19,700 --> 00:50:30,169
I'd like to hear some of our friends and colleagues often has written beautifully on populism and ideas and opera and, you know, others in this room.

417
00:50:30,170 --> 00:50:35,329
So and Anthony is writing a book on Brexit, so we want to hear you on Brexit.

418
00:50:35,330 --> 00:50:41,810
Anthony and and Trump actually. Now his book has been extended from just Brexit to Brexit and Trump.

419
00:50:42,260 --> 00:50:44,329
So it would be really nice to hear you.

420
00:50:44,330 --> 00:50:50,750
And I mean, let's stay a bit on this topic, you know, and whether we want to push back here with with Rob that, you know,

421
00:50:50,750 --> 00:50:56,420
is there still a phenomenon that has rightly or wrongly come under this label of populism,

422
00:50:56,780 --> 00:51:03,680
the notion that some sort of providential person can express the will of a big chunk of the people.

423
00:51:03,950 --> 00:51:08,629
Right. And the elites, you know, I mean, and, you know, I want also to be you know,

424
00:51:08,630 --> 00:51:14,450
to be very clear, I mean, I'm not suggesting there's any reason for complacency.

425
00:51:14,840 --> 00:51:23,030
You know, it is a horrible thing that I mean, what he's done, I think he's done it for reasons of political opportunism, not believe, but unleashed.

426
00:51:23,030 --> 00:51:27,020
And, you know, racism, you know, is a terrible thing.

427
00:51:27,050 --> 00:51:31,010
There are many people who feel it and with some justification,

428
00:51:31,010 --> 00:51:39,829
even physically threatened in America today as a consequence of of the kinds of views that he has unleashed or legitimised.

429
00:51:39,830 --> 00:51:48,170
And I say at least in legitimised, because I'm not sure that what's happened is more people have those views today than before.

430
00:51:48,170 --> 00:51:56,270
And if you look at the demographics, it's fairly clear that people under a certain age don't buy this, you know, really at all.

431
00:51:56,570 --> 00:51:58,879
But still, it's a horrible thing to have happened.

432
00:51:58,880 --> 00:52:05,360
And, you know, it makes me you know, it's made me lose some sleep almost every night since the election.

433
00:52:05,360 --> 00:52:14,850
But I'm. I'm just. It's. It's an awful thing, but I'm still sceptical of the more grandiose explanations for it.

434
00:52:14,870 --> 00:52:24,020
I think it's a combination of different forces and events and personalities more than a sea shift.

435
00:52:24,520 --> 00:52:33,169
And and in the in the fate of liberal democracy, I mean, that's, you know, but but of course, you can have dynamic effects.

436
00:52:33,170 --> 00:52:36,840
And those dynamic effects could be very negative.

437
00:52:36,860 --> 00:52:41,329
So we don't know yet whether there'll be, you know, dynamic effects, in other words,

438
00:52:41,330 --> 00:52:49,220
by being unleashed or legitimised, even if this is not at present anything like a majority, but, you know,

439
00:52:49,320 --> 00:52:58,250
or any kind of coherent coalition, it will it will find a way of becoming so, you know, because of,

440
00:52:58,250 --> 00:53:05,809
you know, of the reaction of the opposition or the failure of leadership in in opposition.

441
00:53:05,810 --> 00:53:13,790
And and and here, you know, I, I think there is a something of a good news story, which is the way in which,

442
00:53:14,180 --> 00:53:19,700
you know, the centrist movement has become, in a way, now the official opposition in the United States.

443
00:53:20,120 --> 00:53:23,360
And and they and Sanders has been very careful.

444
00:53:23,660 --> 00:53:29,510
He unlike much of the, quote unquote, liberal East Coast media, he hasn't demonised Trump.

445
00:53:29,510 --> 00:53:37,790
He said that if Trump brings, you know, has a program to create jobs, infrastructure will be with Trump.

446
00:53:37,790 --> 00:53:44,570
And if he has a program against immigrants will be totally against and against civil rights will be totally against.

447
00:53:44,660 --> 00:53:53,510
So he's saying, you know, my movement is going to judge based on values and policies and it's not going to engage in some,

448
00:53:53,630 --> 00:53:59,510
you know, personal war with Trump as as a villain or or enemy.

449
00:53:59,510 --> 00:54:03,950
And I think that's you know, that's that's the right that's the right approach.

450
00:54:03,950 --> 00:54:12,169
And and and so there is an effective, you know, I think for the moment, an effective, you know, opposition.

451
00:54:12,170 --> 00:54:14,990
And America is also a federal state.

452
00:54:15,350 --> 00:54:26,180
And and there's a lot that's happening at the local and and state level in many places to try and frustrate and counter,

453
00:54:26,600 --> 00:54:36,290
you know, of, you know, some of the, you know, kind of more horrible projects, such as the idea of a registry for for Muslims.

454
00:54:36,290 --> 00:54:42,770
And, you know, it's it's it's almost impossible, given the way that administration works in the United States,

455
00:54:43,160 --> 00:54:48,620
that you could undertake such a thing without the cooperation of state and local, you know, authorities.

456
00:54:48,620 --> 00:54:54,890
I mean, it's just horrifying even to talk about it. But what's involved, right, is going from house to house, place of business.

457
00:54:55,280 --> 00:54:56,389
The place of business.

458
00:54:56,390 --> 00:55:07,310
And if you have widespread resistance, including legal resistance at other levels of government, it's likely to be close to impossible to do it.

459
00:55:07,310 --> 00:55:14,990
And so what I don't what I think the populist narrative says is something that to my mind would be much more catastrophic,

460
00:55:14,990 --> 00:55:18,830
which is that the people has united around this vision.

461
00:55:19,340 --> 00:55:27,229
But I don't see that at all. I see, you know, instead, you know, deep division and very intense opposition,

462
00:55:27,230 --> 00:55:35,930
even to the point where there's a significant part of the the population and and a significant part of the political

463
00:55:36,350 --> 00:55:42,010
and intellectual elite in America that doesn't even believe that Trump has the legitimacy to govern at all.

464
00:55:42,020 --> 00:55:52,009
So, you know, I see, you know, that this is going to be, you know, vigorously contested, you know, and so it's a totally different story.

465
00:55:52,010 --> 00:55:59,239
You know, some people, intellectual, quote unquote, intellectuals, have made analogies to fascism sweeping Europe and the thirties.

466
00:55:59,240 --> 00:56:06,470
And so it's a totally different story because because, you know, Trump has not united the people far from it.

467
00:56:06,710 --> 00:56:11,030
That is not the story of what's going on. But but let's be careful here.

468
00:56:11,870 --> 00:56:15,319
Populists say the people have united around it.

469
00:56:15,320 --> 00:56:24,200
But analysts who still grant room for a populist explanation will say there are people who've gained power who are able to

470
00:56:24,200 --> 00:56:33,439
credibly say the people designating a portion of a people of a population who become the one and only legitimate people.

471
00:56:33,440 --> 00:56:36,110
And of course, our Turkish friends here know this very well.

472
00:56:36,830 --> 00:56:41,600
So there's a difference between the populist narrative that, of course, as social scientists,

473
00:56:41,600 --> 00:56:49,249
we don't buy and us as social scientists saying there is something to this populist wave because it works,

474
00:56:49,250 --> 00:56:52,700
this narrative works, as opposed to this narrative is true.

475
00:56:52,820 --> 00:57:02,059
It works in the body politics. And that then tells us that the story about populism is, is, is one we should pay attention to.

476
00:57:02,060 --> 00:57:05,780
And it's quite a different thing than buying the populist narrative.

477
00:57:06,500 --> 00:57:18,229
Well, I think you know, I think the problem is that that there is a dangerous kind of slippage between the one and the other.

478
00:57:18,230 --> 00:57:25,090
And, you know, I mean, Trump obviously buys the narrative because he it drives him nuts,

479
00:57:25,100 --> 00:57:31,669
but that then then people don't or aren't willing to say then that he has that,

480
00:57:31,670 --> 00:57:36,530
you know, the country and you know that he has the whole people behind him.

481
00:57:36,650 --> 00:57:40,070
I mean, it really bothers him a lot, but it's a reality check.

482
00:57:40,100 --> 00:57:46,040
And and and, you know, he definitely he definitely doesn't.

483
00:57:46,130 --> 00:57:57,560
And, you know, it's it's not as if, you know, people are lining up behind what they you know, what they feel is the strongest force now.

484
00:57:58,920 --> 00:58:05,510
You know, I mean, I want to talk about whether, you know, this is a populist thing or not.

485
00:58:05,510 --> 00:58:11,989
I mean, in this room many times we discuss what populism means, how we should be interpreting it,

486
00:58:11,990 --> 00:58:15,230
and, you know, how we understand different things from populism.

487
00:58:15,980 --> 00:58:21,950
The way you describe what populism is, for me, focusing more like on the demand side, like, you know,

488
00:58:22,160 --> 00:58:26,250
looking at public opinion and whether public opinion is really, you know,

489
00:58:26,270 --> 00:58:31,650
picking up on the messages that are coming from the supply side, meaning Trump.

490
00:58:32,690 --> 00:58:40,969
So I, I feel like if you just focus on public opinion and receiving kind of the message that we get a different picture.

491
00:58:40,970 --> 00:58:47,030
But if we focus on who's giving the message, then perhaps we can still say that it is a populist stick.

492
00:58:47,300 --> 00:58:54,110
And in defining populism is there are various different ways of doing it.

493
00:58:54,110 --> 00:58:58,040
Of course, ideology is one way of defining populism,

494
00:58:58,040 --> 00:59:04,370
but we are kind of contesting that at the moment as well, that definition, because it is restrictive.

495
00:59:05,390 --> 00:59:11,150
But we also see populism as a style, for instance, as far as style.

496
00:59:11,450 --> 00:59:14,330
I saw, you know, style in the style. Yes. Yes.

497
00:59:14,660 --> 00:59:23,630
So, I mean, for instance, there's now a group of people in the literature that focus on populism as, you know, flaunting of the law,

498
00:59:23,870 --> 00:59:32,779
the law meaning the local using local language, local gestures, you know, even local clothing and, you know, picking up on, you know,

499
00:59:32,780 --> 00:59:46,159
local meaning nativist and nativist elements in society, using that in language, in discourse, in a, you know, ways of conveying the message, then,

500
00:59:46,160 --> 00:59:56,510
you know, it becomes appealing to a certain group of people that, you know, vote for that particular political party or leader in that sense.

501
00:59:57,020 --> 01:00:03,290
Would you still say that, you know, Trump should not be defined as populist, as a populist leader?

502
01:00:04,610 --> 01:00:08,150
Um, I think that yeah.

503
01:00:08,180 --> 01:00:24,500
Yes. And that and then I see no shift in, in, in, in behaviour to, you know, to what you describe as a consequence of his, you know, his messages.

504
01:00:25,070 --> 01:00:34,250
I mean, you know, I mean what he has kind of unleashed is, you know, bigotry, uncivil discourse and so on.

505
01:00:34,260 --> 01:00:40,969
But but not, not some return to some conception of of a nativism.

506
01:00:40,970 --> 01:00:47,210
And in a way, he's a representative of what I call in relation to, you know, the left.

507
01:00:47,450 --> 01:00:53,120
SANDERS The politics of expression, you know, what he really looks like style.

508
01:00:53,360 --> 01:01:05,710
Yeah. So, yes, exactly. In terms of style, it's the idea that, you know, people don't just support politicians because they want X or Y policy,

509
01:01:05,720 --> 01:01:10,130
because they want, you know, health care or jobs or whatever.

510
01:01:10,520 --> 01:01:20,450
But because those politicians are willing to give voice to their passions, their prejudices, you know, their anger.

511
01:01:20,660 --> 01:01:33,200
And yeah, so so it's, you know, I think that if one could package Trump's overall style and and and and appeal,

512
01:01:33,830 --> 01:01:37,580
it's reflected in in, you know, what he would say in all these speeches.

513
01:01:37,580 --> 01:01:39,230
Let me be your voice.

514
01:01:39,620 --> 01:01:48,470
In other words, I want you to be able to express these feelings, these passions in politics, and I want to express them on your behalf.

515
01:01:48,590 --> 01:01:54,620
But, you know, expression is a peculiar mode of of political and social being,

516
01:01:54,980 --> 01:02:00,430
because it doesn't necessarily involve changing anything in in in action.

517
01:02:00,440 --> 01:02:06,070
It's it's like being able to get it out there that, you know, you know.

518
01:02:06,280 --> 01:02:14,530
And and so the enemy and I think some of the journalists and commentators who said this are actually onto something.

519
01:02:14,530 --> 01:02:19,240
The enemy in many ways was political correctness, like what was bottling up the expression.

520
01:02:19,720 --> 01:02:24,459
And so, you know, it's like taking it's like saying, I can take the lid off.

521
01:02:24,460 --> 01:02:26,170
And not only can I take the lid off,

522
01:02:26,170 --> 01:02:35,410
I can be your megaphone and I can be the vehicle of collective expression of what you've had to keep quiet about or felt there was no,

523
01:02:35,740 --> 01:02:42,820
you know, public and socially validating vehicle for expressing ideas.

524
01:02:44,170 --> 01:02:49,389
And I would like just to come back to one had one statement you made a little earlier,

525
01:02:49,390 --> 01:02:57,250
which is that the victory of Trump in and of itself is not necessarily it does not signal the end of the liberal Democratic model or whatever.

526
01:02:57,260 --> 01:03:03,680
And if you think about it, then this is precisely the situation for which the liberal Democratic model was invented.

527
01:03:03,700 --> 01:03:06,969
It was invented. And for the system of checks and balances.

528
01:03:06,970 --> 01:03:14,140
Yes, if you have such a person to constrain him or her in through the systemic makeup, because I mean,

529
01:03:14,140 --> 01:03:19,180
the time parties were very aware of this potential to to unite the people in that way.

530
01:03:19,180 --> 01:03:20,290
So in that sense,

531
01:03:20,290 --> 01:03:28,359
I would agree that the election and the strategy that you have outlined and the Democratic Party being slightly differently organised,

532
01:03:28,360 --> 01:03:36,730
maybe we would have had a battle between Sanders and and Trump and then it would be a completely different story to be talking about.

533
01:03:36,760 --> 01:03:45,810
However, I, I think what we need to think now is about the robustness of the American constitutional system and

534
01:03:45,820 --> 01:03:51,940
its and how and you said you said practical constraints in terms of this muscle registry and so on.

535
01:03:52,210 --> 01:04:01,710
But how, how, how strict these are or how how able to defend itself is the system of checks and balances.

536
01:04:01,720 --> 01:04:06,250
If you have such a president, you have a Congress that is run by Republicans,

537
01:04:06,300 --> 01:04:11,440
you have a Supreme Court that, if it does anything, will do it in two or three years time.

538
01:04:11,820 --> 01:04:21,520
So, look. Well, what is there to to actually stop it from doing these things and dismantling the liberal model from within in the second phase,

539
01:04:21,520 --> 01:04:24,920
rather than his election being the dismantlement of the system?

540
01:04:25,360 --> 01:04:30,969
So I wrote about this. Yes. And I think I think you're absolutely right to invoke the framers,

541
01:04:30,970 --> 01:04:42,620
because often we think today of the framers vision of checks and balances is simply about constitutional formalism, but it was also about, you know,

542
01:04:43,360 --> 01:04:55,420
the you know, the sociological reality of US society and the interaction between that and constitutional formalism about the that,

543
01:04:55,630 --> 01:05:02,560
you know, America was not was was a society founded on anti-racist principles.

544
01:05:03,370 --> 01:05:08,050
You know, there is no there is no loyal, you know,

545
01:05:08,080 --> 01:05:21,580
high civil service in America that has been socialised that to serve with complete obedience whomever is the leader or ruler.

546
01:05:22,450 --> 01:05:27,659
Even the military is fairly unruly and will disagree with the president.

547
01:05:27,660 --> 01:05:36,220
And and often it will come close to refusing to do something.

548
01:05:36,670 --> 01:05:40,780
They won't say it explicitly, but, you know, it's very difficult.

549
01:05:40,780 --> 01:05:45,429
As you know, Obama found he was blamed for not engaging in all these humanitarian.

550
01:05:45,430 --> 01:05:50,169
And perhaps it's very difficult in a system like the American one where, you know,

551
01:05:50,170 --> 01:06:01,690
it's not a military junta for for for the for a civilian president to impose a military operation where the Joint Chiefs are completely opposed to it.

552
01:06:02,140 --> 01:06:11,469
You know, so it's a it's there is a kind of and if you look at the sociology of Washington and if you watch House of Cards or West Wing and so on,

553
01:06:11,470 --> 01:06:18,670
yeah, you can see it very much. And in operation, I mean, everyone is ambitious for themselves that on the one hand,

554
01:06:18,670 --> 01:06:28,780
they may supposedly be loyal to the president or the White House, but they're also looking out for themselves and watching their own back.

555
01:06:28,780 --> 01:06:32,380
What will happen in three years time? Will I have a job?

556
01:06:32,440 --> 01:06:35,530
Who will be running? Who will? Who will possibly?

557
01:06:35,740 --> 01:06:39,070
Can I work for that or unite myself behind?

558
01:06:39,430 --> 01:06:49,480
So the system, you know, sociological reality of a political system with many, many checks and balances and egos set against each other.

559
01:06:49,960 --> 01:06:59,260
And in a way, I worry more I worry less about the, you know, the the, you know,

560
01:06:59,260 --> 01:07:05,890
the kind of Hitler or Nazi scenario of the consolidation of power and the destruction of a.

561
01:07:06,000 --> 01:07:12,149
Constitutional order. From the inside. Then, then the ungoverned ability possibility.

562
01:07:12,150 --> 01:07:21,500
Because, you know, what Trump has done is he's appointed all these strong personalities, leaders of business and generals and so on.

563
01:07:21,510 --> 01:07:29,970
I mean, some of these generals themselves have longstanding feuds, and I don't know how they're there.

564
01:07:30,570 --> 01:07:41,160
He's is to govern with the cabinet, with this ersatz group of very different but all very big ego personalities who don't particularly have

565
01:07:41,160 --> 01:07:47,580
a lot of links to gather the kinds of links traditionally that one had through elite institutions,

566
01:07:47,880 --> 01:07:51,400
political, political, party and so on.

567
01:07:51,420 --> 01:08:04,470
It's a it's a strange group of very wilful individuals, very in their own narrow way, accomplished older men, basically.

568
01:08:04,890 --> 01:08:08,370
And we'll just see how that how that works out.

569
01:08:08,390 --> 01:08:17,960
And, you know, let's let's hope that we can we can we can keep them out of the Viagra jar for enough time to actually settle down.

570
01:08:17,970 --> 01:08:25,200
And and and and and and deliberate with each other in the fashion necessary of, you know,

571
01:08:25,200 --> 01:08:32,969
to govern a superpower in the in the complex governance environment we have today.

572
01:08:32,970 --> 01:08:36,690
But I, I seriously worry just about ungoverned ability.

573
01:08:37,380 --> 01:08:44,370
So in that sense, that is shouldn't be too worried about the dissolution of the Liberal order is going to be super liberal.

574
01:08:44,490 --> 01:08:49,110
So I've got, I've got many heads I've got in order.

575
01:08:49,110 --> 01:08:54,260
Paul Memmott, Anthony Joseph often.

576
01:08:55,050 --> 01:08:57,870
Okay. So good. Okay. Thank you.

577
01:08:58,500 --> 01:09:03,909
I agree with most things you're saying, but one thing that you did was you suggested these people were somewhat voiceless before Trump.

578
01:09:03,910 --> 01:09:09,590
And my guess is that they, in fact had already been politicised, mobilised, I think, through the Tea Party.

579
01:09:11,330 --> 01:09:15,520
And talk radio, right wing talk radio to lose coalition of kind of working class,

580
01:09:15,560 --> 01:09:19,820
middle class whites that this was built on this idea of kind of anti needs anti-government.

581
01:09:20,360 --> 01:09:25,750
Now, in a sense what he's turn out to be a message of anti foreigners. I think since the insurgents taken that particular group of people,

582
01:09:25,790 --> 01:09:30,260
can turn that in a direction that became a particular very that's kind of political edge.

583
01:09:31,310 --> 01:09:37,610
The myth he didn't talk about very much was another one, which is, you know, the voter turnout, something like around 60%.

584
01:09:37,610 --> 01:09:42,530
So all this discussion about this somehow this debate or this big election galvanise the American public is brand new ways.

585
01:09:42,740 --> 01:09:48,080
It's still very low voter turnout. And so he's left the 49% off about 59% total.

586
01:09:48,290 --> 01:09:54,889
There's still a huge amount of difference and scepticism. And, you know, as you say, a lot of people were voting for him with this idea.

587
01:09:54,890 --> 01:10:00,520
He can deliver things through the walls mostly, but he can't do that.

588
01:10:00,530 --> 01:10:05,950
This is like what we was about. As for to actually does a lot, lot faster than he did.

589
01:10:05,960 --> 01:10:15,870
So it looks like a potential return to maybe actually initially a kind of encouraging anticipation actually much faster than he wants it.

590
01:10:15,920 --> 01:10:26,900
Absolutely. I agree with everything. And and definitely, you know, you know, the the Tea Party, the and the talk radio and all of that,

591
01:10:27,230 --> 01:10:32,150
you know, was the preparation for, you know, for for Trump in some sense prepare the ground.

592
01:10:32,540 --> 01:10:39,139
But the but what do you what what is what was frustrating a lot of these people was not that they couldn't get on talk radio and express

593
01:10:39,140 --> 01:10:48,440
themselves among each other but that but that what quote unquote Washington or the mainstream media and so on were just ridiculed as extremists.

594
01:10:48,440 --> 01:10:51,680
And so what Trump promised is that we're going to make them hear your voice.

595
01:10:52,040 --> 01:11:00,560
And instead of laughing about, you know, these uneducated yahoos, boy, are they going to be frightened by your voice, you know.

596
01:11:00,570 --> 01:11:10,250
So it was who they wanted to be heard by that that, you know, and that goes to the mainstream thing that because Trump could self-finance and,

597
01:11:10,250 --> 01:11:21,830
you know, could it be shut down by the party machine, he could guarantee them that he that he had the you know, the you know, the nerves, you know,

598
01:11:21,860 --> 01:11:31,160
and the ability to bring their voice and make and make it resound at the national level and get them taken taken seriously there,

599
01:11:31,520 --> 01:11:36,049
as opposed to just marginalise those the Tea Party or, you know, these, you know,

600
01:11:36,050 --> 01:11:43,310
kind of nutcases who the Republican Party has been flirting with on its on its most extreme edges.

601
01:11:43,310 --> 01:11:47,840
And so that that mainstreaming of the voice that I think he he was offering them.

602
01:11:48,050 --> 01:11:56,270
But everything I really essentially agree with all you said and say and would really you know really echo add I mean even

603
01:11:56,270 --> 01:12:06,200
the idea so apparently he said something Trump said something like that the about that he wasn't going to pay any of the,

604
01:12:06,530 --> 01:12:14,060
you know, incumbent ambassadors after, you know, the day after he's in office.

605
01:12:15,500 --> 01:12:23,570
You know, he would fire them and not pay them. Well, I mean, I don't think there's a problem with withdrawing their credentials.

606
01:12:23,840 --> 01:12:30,360
You you the executive could do that, but try stopping, you know, paycheques in Washington.

607
01:12:30,360 --> 01:12:34,099
And one day, I mean, it's just not you know, it's not going to happen.

608
01:12:34,100 --> 01:12:38,720
It's hard to get a paycheque in Washington in one day and it's hard to stop one.

609
01:12:38,750 --> 01:12:46,280
And, you know, I think that this is just a small comic example of the disconnect between Trump's experience

610
01:12:46,730 --> 01:12:52,250
as a as a businessman running a family company where you can hire and fire people in a day,

611
01:12:52,610 --> 01:12:57,739
you know, you can fire your whole team and, you know, they can they can sue or whatever.

612
01:12:57,740 --> 01:13:00,740
You just send a lawyer and deal with that.

613
01:13:00,740 --> 01:13:07,190
And if you if you want to break a contract, you break a contract and you might have to pay a price of a court order.

614
01:13:07,190 --> 01:13:13,099
Is it? Yeah. I mean, this is obviously not the way the government the government works.

615
01:13:13,100 --> 01:13:22,639
And and, you know, I would be much more worried about Trump if he'd had the experience of having been a cabinet officer or a governor or a general who

616
01:13:22,640 --> 01:13:35,930
actually does know how how orders can be given and and people be be controlled in a in a complex political system and bureaucracy.

617
01:13:35,930 --> 01:13:39,379
But he he's never had that experience. He's just had the experience.

618
01:13:39,380 --> 01:13:45,970
I hire good lawyers and and I and I do what I want, you know, day by day, based on bureaucracies itself.

619
01:13:45,980 --> 01:13:49,880
And the checks and balances we were talking about, that is checks and balances,

620
01:13:50,450 --> 01:13:55,099
the inertia of the bureaucracy and rules that mean that will not he can't just do this.

621
01:13:55,100 --> 01:14:03,020
So that's a maybe that's more even more important than the last point that Paul made that the fizzling it out or if won't deliver the outcome.

622
01:14:03,020 --> 01:14:09,950
I mean yeah I mean he won't deliver the outcome because there's anyway limit your next.

623
01:14:10,070 --> 01:14:16,310
And then Anthony and Joseph. And also the component you just on, you just know that nothing is up to all this question.

624
01:14:16,670 --> 01:14:21,409
Yes, I fully agree that it is enough checks and balances in the American system just to control it.

625
01:14:21,410 --> 01:14:29,030
But I'm not, you know, just I can't say this and just as confidently for the international system, for the international system itself,

626
01:14:29,030 --> 01:14:35,959
I think the worst or the scariest danger that a Trump administration may pose is for the liberal international system,

627
01:14:35,960 --> 01:14:39,550
because when it comes to developing countries trying to develop their economies,

628
01:14:39,560 --> 01:14:47,190
one of the most important checks and balances is the normative check that liberal international system is providing for.

629
01:14:47,510 --> 01:14:54,880
But with such a strong culture and discourse in the US coupled with the Putin International's,

630
01:14:55,160 --> 01:15:03,530
let's put it like this developing countries or in fragile democracies of developing countries, companies make some real reversal in this process.

631
01:15:04,220 --> 01:15:07,670
This is the, you know, just come on part. I mean, I also want to ask you a question.

632
01:15:07,670 --> 01:15:12,080
I'm coming back to your comments regarding the trade system and globalisation were

633
01:15:12,230 --> 01:15:17,570
very good mean vehicles of globalisation are really wonderful to hear what you think,

634
01:15:17,870 --> 01:15:22,309
what their trade policy could be, not based on what they said.

635
01:15:22,310 --> 01:15:24,139
You said they said all sorts of things.

636
01:15:24,140 --> 01:15:30,830
But on the one hand me examine examining just in discourse, it sounds like a unilateral policy that he will defend.

637
01:15:31,070 --> 01:15:32,540
But on the other hand, I mean,

638
01:15:32,540 --> 01:15:39,830
the entire administration is made of American corporate system and they are the ones who will suffer most because of a unilateralist policy,

639
01:15:40,100 --> 01:15:48,080
how those two powers will play out. And in relation with this, I mean, we have an international institution, WTO,

640
01:15:48,320 --> 01:15:55,670
that is already under a lot of stress because of the failure of the Doha Round, because of the differences within the institution itself.

641
01:15:55,880 --> 01:16:02,060
And indeed, almost the only strong side of the institution is its dispute settlement mechanism.

642
01:16:02,510 --> 01:16:08,660
If they adopt a unilateralist policy that will put an immense stress on the WTO as well,

643
01:16:09,170 --> 01:16:15,620
and how they see the prospects of WTO under a Trump administration is is particularly important in this country,

644
01:16:15,620 --> 01:16:25,759
because if Brexit ever happens, British politicians would like very much on the WTO and on the existence of the WTO down the way.

645
01:16:25,760 --> 01:16:30,049
It may be a very important challenge for Britain as well, right?

646
01:16:30,050 --> 01:16:35,210
Well, the first the first your first observation and that also worries me a lot.

647
01:16:36,380 --> 01:16:42,500
I mean, the you know, the the legitimation kind of of strongman politics, you know,

648
01:16:42,890 --> 01:16:53,030
I think will have terrible negative kind of vibrations around the world and already has.

649
01:16:53,990 --> 01:17:03,470
So let's hope I mean, from that point of view, I one should be hopeful about that, that he fails to be an effective strongman.

650
01:17:03,620 --> 01:17:14,239
And, in fact, is that he he really comes out of this, you know, New York family, businessman, background.

651
01:17:14,240 --> 01:17:21,770
And, you know, I don't know. I mean, you know, it's like it's like, you know, can you be a strongman by tweeting?

652
01:17:21,770 --> 01:17:32,929
You know, I mean, maybe yes or maybe not. It remains to be seen whether, you know, he can he can deliver on on that image.

653
01:17:32,930 --> 01:17:39,110
But the image itself is a harmful one for the reasons that you let you describe on the WTO.

654
01:17:39,110 --> 01:17:45,290
I'm more hopeful on he did Trump at one point called the WTO horrible.

655
01:17:46,250 --> 01:17:51,680
He he's never in the campaign really floated the idea of withdrawing from it although

656
01:17:51,680 --> 01:17:55,820
some people have said that he said that he I haven't been able to find that out.

657
01:17:57,290 --> 01:18:00,290
There will be a lot of disputes on the dispute settlement system.

658
01:18:00,830 --> 01:18:07,940
And in a way, the dispute settlement system may be one of the best buffers for, you know, any kind of trade war.

659
01:18:08,600 --> 01:18:15,710
My view, and I've expressed this in some recent writing, including an op ed from a few weeks ago,

660
01:18:16,250 --> 01:18:20,360
is that is that, you know, China will not go [INAUDIBLE] for tat with with Trump.

661
01:18:20,360 --> 01:18:29,030
Instead, they'll react to actions he takes that violate WTO by going to WTO dispute settlement.

662
01:18:29,030 --> 01:18:34,309
I mean, and they might also react by punishing U.S. companies in China,

663
01:18:34,310 --> 01:18:39,280
especially those companies happen to be connected to some of the key people in the administration.

664
01:18:39,290 --> 01:18:50,240
So there's that side. But I don't think that they I think China has too much of a stake itself in the WTO framework who are to to,

665
01:18:50,270 --> 01:18:54,470
you know, unleash a trade war that would break that framework down.

666
01:18:54,860 --> 01:18:58,040
So I think they'll bring cases and dispute settlement.

667
01:18:58,430 --> 01:19:03,589
And as you know, how long do those cases take to win their way through the system when their way through

668
01:19:03,590 --> 01:19:09,980
the system three or four years through the entire administration will basically.

669
01:19:10,060 --> 01:19:15,040
Send the trade war to Geneva, you know, for the Trump administration.

670
01:19:15,040 --> 01:19:22,060
And, you know, that's a great way I think of, you know, in a way diffusing it or preventing it from, you know,

671
01:19:22,990 --> 01:19:30,040
unravelling, you know, global economic governance on a kind of, you know, 1920s, thirties nightmare scenario.

672
01:19:31,380 --> 01:19:36,060
Anthony. Yeah. I think you may be too sanguine about the company.

673
01:19:37,310 --> 01:19:41,040
He's just a comment that would give us a question about things really important.

674
01:19:41,390 --> 01:19:51,260
And, you know, the hearings were already suggesting the Americans could well trigger a military dispute with China in the South China Sea.

675
01:19:52,230 --> 01:20:00,110
So the Chinese claim is that I have absolutely no basis to justify claims.

676
01:20:01,520 --> 01:20:10,220
Chinese expansionism. And if you're if you're in political trouble and you start a war with the Chinese.

677
01:20:11,730 --> 01:20:17,340
And that's the way in which we felt. I just think so.

678
01:20:17,540 --> 01:20:19,130
I just think, you know these guys.

679
01:20:20,310 --> 01:20:32,370
But the question I've got in passing has struck me is really important, is that Bernie Sanders is becoming the opposition,

680
01:20:33,360 --> 01:20:41,970
the very consistent in his resistance, in fact, to face down and defeat Trump if it's organised.

681
01:20:43,440 --> 01:20:55,320
And it's very unclear whether the Sanders movement and Elizabeth Warren will become the opposition, will define the opposition.

682
01:20:55,710 --> 01:20:56,790
What are the Clintons?

683
01:20:57,150 --> 01:21:06,540
So, you know, I mean, here you've seen in the post Brexit that black in a sense is the the figure of his most defeats is already,

684
01:21:06,690 --> 01:21:14,069
you know, announcing himself as the insurgent and indeed the opposition to Brexit, which is a completely new situation.

685
01:21:14,070 --> 01:21:19,980
But they haven't given up. And I imagine Clinton less than a year and a half ago to $3 million.

686
01:21:20,880 --> 01:21:29,520
So she has legitimate the Clinton wing of the Democrats must feel that in one sense the election has been stolen from with some justification.

687
01:21:30,270 --> 01:21:34,559
So, you know, this game, what is the what are the forces about?

688
01:21:34,560 --> 01:21:38,550
How will the opposition will be organised.

689
01:21:39,450 --> 01:21:45,650
So does is to go to become the next candidate who is trying to they have a natural candidate.

690
01:21:45,660 --> 01:21:49,200
What is that that's panning out.

691
01:21:49,680 --> 01:21:54,450
I've seen the coverage of this. His medicines and. What is going on?

692
01:21:54,630 --> 01:22:03,870
Well, the immediate context is the struggle over who controls the the the the Democratic Party committee,

693
01:22:03,870 --> 01:22:10,890
the committee that basically rules the Democratic Party National Committee.

694
01:22:11,340 --> 01:22:20,910
And and so, you know, the Sanders movement and has presented a candidate, Keith Ellison, from, I believe, Chicago,

695
01:22:21,660 --> 01:22:28,110
who's a very impressive candidate of the centre or centre right of the Democratic Party,

696
01:22:28,110 --> 01:22:32,580
is trying to find new world chair of the Democratic National Committee.

697
01:22:35,040 --> 01:22:40,679
The what I would call the centre or centre right of the Democratic Party has been

698
01:22:40,680 --> 01:22:49,800
struggling to find other candidates who would stand up to Ellison in this contest,

699
01:22:49,830 --> 01:22:57,100
which I believe is in February, I think, or I don't know exactly, but it will be decided soon.

700
01:22:57,120 --> 01:23:12,390
So that's one dimension. Another dimension is the extent to which of the the Clinton apparatus is simply kind of dissolved.

701
01:23:12,960 --> 01:23:14,790
And this kind of surprised me.

702
01:23:14,970 --> 01:23:25,410
It surprised me that that Clinton conceded the election so fast because at the time that she conceded that there was the possibility,

703
01:23:25,410 --> 01:23:36,899
given the popular vote, that that judicial challenges might actually affect or reverse the outcome of Trump's victory.

704
01:23:36,900 --> 01:23:41,460
I mean, it was possible. It was, as it turned out, not something that came to be.

705
01:23:41,730 --> 01:23:45,270
Eventually, there were some some legal challenges.

706
01:23:46,410 --> 01:23:55,630
But my sense is that is that, you know, Hillary Clinton has really disappeared.

707
01:23:55,650 --> 01:24:08,580
Now, is this a tactic to just, you know, be out of the limelight for a period of time and then regroup and and and make a comeback?

708
01:24:09,510 --> 01:24:23,129
I, I doubt it. I doubt it because people are so upset now and so worried that her failure to be a leader at this time, especially given, as you say,

709
01:24:23,130 --> 01:24:31,680
that she did, in fact, win the popular vote, would be terribly held against her if she tried to make, you know, a comeback.

710
01:24:31,680 --> 01:24:37,969
I just don't think. Not just that, but I mean, the whole package is not sellable.

711
01:24:37,970 --> 01:24:41,290
And and is is is Sanders too old?

712
01:24:41,310 --> 01:24:49,140
I'm not sure. You know, young people, you would buy it if you haven't noticed the big bias.

713
01:24:49,410 --> 01:24:53,910
The irony is that the people in their twenties don't think he's too old.

714
01:24:54,510 --> 01:24:58,020
You know, it's true. My kids and older, I mean, I adore him.

715
01:24:58,620 --> 01:25:03,660
You know, I would would Elizabeth Warren make a stronger candidate?

716
01:25:04,380 --> 01:25:07,530
You know, maybe that occurred at the same age.

717
01:25:08,880 --> 01:25:14,610
Well, as seven or eight, I think seven or eight. But she's a woman.

718
01:25:14,610 --> 01:25:20,070
And there are, I think, a high probability that next time around on the Republican side, we will have a woman.

719
01:25:20,380 --> 01:25:29,010
And I've supported and fundraised for a law professor, colleague and friend of mine,

720
01:25:29,340 --> 01:25:34,110
Zephyr Teachout, who has become now a national political figure in the United States.

721
01:25:34,110 --> 01:25:38,000
Zephyr, you know, is part of the centrist movement.

722
01:25:38,010 --> 01:25:45,510
She's around 40. She probably would have won her the congressional contest she fought.

723
01:25:45,810 --> 01:25:52,379
Have the trend been the other way towards Democrats rather than Republicans in the congressional elections?

724
01:25:52,380 --> 01:25:59,470
She's she's a very impressive political figure. And probably next time was too early for her to run for president.

725
01:25:59,490 --> 01:26:05,190
But but she's also she's someone who's now being discussed as a compromise candidate

726
01:26:05,190 --> 01:26:10,290
for the Democratic National Committee because although part of the Sanders movement,

727
01:26:11,340 --> 01:26:15,899
she reached out to the Clinton people in certain ways.

728
01:26:15,900 --> 01:26:21,479
And and and she actually earned the endorsement, for example,

729
01:26:21,480 --> 01:26:30,270
of New York Senator Chuck Schumer when when she was running for the Democratic nomination for Congress.

730
01:26:30,270 --> 01:26:37,440
And that signalled that that Zephyr was somebody who, although she came out of the Sanders movement,

731
01:26:37,440 --> 01:26:42,269
would be acceptable to the centre of the Democratic Party,

732
01:26:42,270 --> 01:26:46,810
or maybe that the centre realised that it would have to reach out, you know, to the,

733
01:26:46,830 --> 01:26:53,310
to the left or what some people would call, like it or not, a populist left of the party for new blood and new leadership.

734
01:26:53,760 --> 01:27:01,590
So I don't think there's an all a sense of, you know, of of despair or disarray.

735
01:27:04,380 --> 01:27:16,470
What it well, what's fairly clear is that, you know, the the party, you know, even before the election result,

736
01:27:16,470 --> 01:27:24,570
it was clear that the party was starting to tear itself apart by by kind of closing, you know,

737
01:27:24,570 --> 01:27:29,969
circling the wagons around Clinton and that it was going to have to open up to forces like the

738
01:27:29,970 --> 01:27:37,560
Sanders movement if it was going to really survive and be viable for especially for younger voters.

739
01:27:38,130 --> 01:27:41,790
You know, going forward, the next, you know, 15, 20 years.

740
01:27:42,150 --> 01:27:47,100
So that was already starting to happen with Wasserman Schultz resignation and

741
01:27:47,100 --> 01:27:52,650
certain other events that showed that the party realised that it couldn't just,

742
01:27:53,040 --> 01:27:58,870
you know, push off, you know, the the forces represented by by the Sanders movement.

743
01:27:59,250 --> 01:28:03,020
So that's that's my take on what's, you know, what's going on now.

744
01:28:03,030 --> 01:28:11,969
I don't think that the centre or the kind of people who saw themselves as kind of naturally aligned with Hillary

745
01:28:11,970 --> 01:28:21,090
Clinton have themselves a group of people who could be future leaders to to propose who are who are plausible.

746
01:28:21,120 --> 01:28:24,330
So so it may be Sanders, it may be Warren.

747
01:28:24,600 --> 01:28:30,120
It may be someone else again. But I think that the next leader going, you know,

748
01:28:30,300 --> 01:28:39,120
and and presidential candidate for the Democratic Party is going to be someone who has a very significant political base in the Sanders movement.

749
01:28:40,050 --> 01:28:46,140
Now, I know we have reached 2:00, and if anyone needs to leave, you know, please do so.

750
01:28:46,140 --> 01:28:50,850
But Joseph and often I know have always interesting things to say.

751
01:28:50,850 --> 01:28:54,780
So, you know, if you don't mind, we have a bit more time.

752
01:28:54,780 --> 01:29:01,049
So we'll we'll continue for a few minutes more. And perhaps, though, you should ask her questions at the same time.

753
01:29:01,050 --> 01:29:04,410
And then so Joseph and.

754
01:29:06,240 --> 01:29:10,080
Yeah. Yeah. I've just had a question about kind of Brexit on trade and so on.

755
01:29:10,090 --> 01:29:15,750
I rebalance gave an interview a few months ago on BBC that I've seen before, and she was just saying that,

756
01:29:16,100 --> 01:29:23,410
well, because the UK is a small market, it's going to be in every case, the the deal taker, deal maker.

757
01:29:24,100 --> 01:29:29,550
And I was just wondering if you had any any thoughts on that? You agree with that assessment or what what kind of.

758
01:29:30,900 --> 01:29:32,970
What do you think of the UK's?

759
01:29:34,200 --> 01:29:43,800
The U.S. trade negotiating position will be that either you get the trade deals back to your U.S. or China and often it's a different thing.

760
01:29:44,220 --> 01:29:52,320
Yeah, I know, obviously. But I think I think when it goes, okay, I'll let you know.

761
01:29:52,740 --> 01:29:59,840
Sorry, I got it. I think I think the negotiations this will not take a long time, sir.

762
01:29:59,850 --> 01:30:10,589
I think the negotiations with non EU countries are not going to be a big problem because the starting point is the WTO agreements.

763
01:30:10,590 --> 01:30:17,480
And, and so basically with respect to non-EU countries, the,

764
01:30:17,490 --> 01:30:22,889
the the UK would have a plausible position that it should simply continue to conduct

765
01:30:22,890 --> 01:30:31,200
trade on the terms which which exist under the WTO agreements and in some cases where,

766
01:30:31,230 --> 01:30:37,620
you know, like agricultural quotas and things like that, there might have to be special negotiations because that,

767
01:30:38,190 --> 01:30:44,760
you know, the EU is part of the overall sorry, the UK is part of the overall EU agricultural quota.

768
01:30:45,120 --> 01:30:49,410
And so there, you know, there would be some technical issues that would have to be managed there.

769
01:30:50,970 --> 01:30:54,600
And the real difficulty is what to negotiate with the EU.

770
01:30:55,170 --> 01:31:01,620
I mean because obviously, you know, the UK is exiting the Customs Union, you know,

771
01:31:01,860 --> 01:31:11,579
the the WTO status quo is not going to be a baseline, you know, for, you know, for trade relations with the EU.

772
01:31:11,580 --> 01:31:18,149
Those really will have to be negotiated. So she added an example and just another EU country.

773
01:31:18,150 --> 01:31:25,139
So she has the example of the Chinese Swiss trade and how it's with the Chinese to deal with.

774
01:31:25,140 --> 01:31:30,840
The Chinese will have access to Swiss markets and then ten years later the Swiss will be able to access the Chinese markets.

775
01:31:31,170 --> 01:31:35,760
And she was kind of like gesturing to these possible kinds of problems for the UK.

776
01:31:36,330 --> 01:31:41,760
I mean, do you think that's plausible or is this is the UK just the difference why?

777
01:31:42,180 --> 01:31:48,210
I don't see why China would object to conducting trade relations with the UK based upon WTO law.

778
01:31:48,390 --> 01:31:57,540
The difference is that what I was saying is basically the UK inherits all of the EU deals with the,

779
01:31:57,750 --> 01:32:02,610
you know, the the 53 agreements and all sorts of other agreements that over there already.

780
01:32:02,610 --> 01:32:09,750
So they're going to be grandfathered. So she wasn't the right analogy because she's talking little Switzerland negotiates with China.

781
01:32:10,740 --> 01:32:13,770
Unsurprisingly, Little Switzerland gets a bad deal.

782
01:32:14,160 --> 01:32:17,610
But this is different because UK was part of big EU.

783
01:32:18,060 --> 01:32:21,660
Going out of the EU keeps the same deals on tariffs.

784
01:32:21,990 --> 01:32:29,969
Now I think there is a caveat. I mean, there's caveats on tariffs, but they're manageable, as Bob was saying.

785
01:32:29,970 --> 01:32:33,790
But there's also the whole big caveat that if it's not tariffs,

786
01:32:33,790 --> 01:32:40,049
then it's much more complicated because there are regulatory agreements, etc., which have to do with cooperation.

787
01:32:40,050 --> 01:32:48,360
And and there might not be, you know, in the long run, as sustainable as with the EU, where there's a machinery to to uphold them.

788
01:32:48,360 --> 01:32:51,840
So that's, you know, a caveat, I think, to what you're saying.

789
01:32:52,140 --> 01:33:00,930
Well well, I'm saying that it's I'm creating what I'm saying myself by saying with other EU countries or the former,

790
01:33:00,960 --> 01:33:04,290
you know, there's going to be it's going to be very difficult.

791
01:33:04,300 --> 01:33:11,970
No, I'm saying even with the rest of the world. So apart from agriculture and maybe textiles, what would be the problem?

792
01:33:11,970 --> 01:33:15,780
I mean, the other services, you know, commitments, yeah.

793
01:33:15,780 --> 01:33:22,200
Or. Yeah, all sorts of mutual recognition of professionals are there's very actually very I mean,

794
01:33:22,200 --> 01:33:33,630
there's a lot there's been there are a lot of aspirational clauses and got to move move towards all those things.

795
01:33:34,110 --> 01:33:38,220
But but almost none of them have have been fulfilled.

796
01:33:39,120 --> 01:33:43,679
So you're saying that the agreements between the EU and the rest of the world are mostly tariff issues?

797
01:33:43,680 --> 01:33:48,579
And that I mean, there might be there might be some services commitments.

798
01:33:48,580 --> 01:33:53,250
So you might have to look out of procurement as well.

799
01:33:53,250 --> 01:34:05,250
And but but procurement was almost like done in a federal way where, you know, I think the commission actually put, you know,

800
01:34:05,400 --> 01:34:15,389
differentiated between the procurement agencies that would be bound in different EU countries and exceptions for individual countries.

801
01:34:15,390 --> 01:34:18,780
So that's already differentiated, I believe so.

802
01:34:19,200 --> 01:34:26,550
So I mean, I think on the WTO front, there is some complexity on agriculture and maybe one or two other areas where,

803
01:34:26,910 --> 01:34:33,720
you know, the EU has a right to a certain kind of quota or, you know, there are quantitative limits that are.

804
01:34:34,090 --> 01:34:38,590
Expressed in terms of being an entitlement of the EU as a whole.

805
01:34:39,610 --> 01:34:48,550
And there you would then have to prorate them in some way to reflect, you know, the UK going its own way on the WTO.

806
01:34:48,850 --> 01:34:54,520
But but apart from those two or three areas, I mean, you know, technical barriers to trade subsidies,

807
01:34:54,520 --> 01:34:57,940
agreement and so on, I don't see anything that would need to be changed.

808
01:34:59,530 --> 01:35:04,179
Awesome. Okay, Rob, I love the beginning of it.

809
01:35:04,180 --> 01:35:09,370
When you mentioned that, you know, you see what's happening as a strategy to work closely done in the force.

810
01:35:09,370 --> 01:35:12,389
And I look at it because that's my kind of approach to work.

811
01:35:12,390 --> 01:35:18,280
So and that also helps me not to compare with the 1950s because I don't see these guys being at your

812
01:35:18,280 --> 01:35:24,280
logical terms about I'm not going to ask you the question that I wanted to ask at the beginning,

813
01:35:24,310 --> 01:35:29,379
okay? Because it's too long and where you can sit and make a fake.

814
01:35:29,380 --> 01:35:33,100
I think the collection of Europe, because that was the part of the left and it was also,

815
01:35:33,100 --> 01:35:37,720
you know, in our paper and because you've done your own vision of what to was.

816
01:35:38,090 --> 01:35:42,970
So there are obvious differences between the two and in my reading.

817
01:35:43,180 --> 01:35:47,469
One of the weaknesses in Europe is the disintegration of social democracy.

818
01:35:47,470 --> 01:35:55,300
I mean, that was a lot for those, you know, parties and movements to be able to get hold of some of those voices.

819
01:35:56,290 --> 01:36:00,580
But my question informs whatever academics or predictions are going to do it.

820
01:36:01,780 --> 01:36:04,480
And that's your last you're the last question. So it's okay.

821
01:36:05,200 --> 01:36:12,070
How do you see the outcome of this election in the United States affecting this, you know, Europe of 2017?

822
01:36:12,250 --> 01:36:16,690
I mean, do you think it's going to strengthen your vision or is it going to be to the opposite direction?

823
01:36:17,680 --> 01:36:25,480
Well, I think I would I would then revert to your comment where I do I do see one of the harmful impacts, as,

824
01:36:26,050 --> 01:36:36,280
you know, the you know, America being big, you know, standing as an example of is strongman type, you know,

825
01:36:36,280 --> 01:36:42,939
a politics where at least even even if there is not authoritarianism practices, authoritarianism and discourse,

826
01:36:42,940 --> 01:36:48,790
and that it's discourse that really carries across the ocean, you know, chastising of the journalists.

827
01:36:49,060 --> 01:36:57,270
Yeah, exactly. Exactly. You know, which you know. And so that I think is, is quite negative.

828
01:36:57,280 --> 01:37:06,609
I, I completely agree. I mean, if I were to give policy prescriptions, I would say that one of them is the desperate need to rebuild social democracy.

829
01:37:06,610 --> 01:37:14,890
And and and in fact, a mutual friend of Calypso and mine, you know,

830
01:37:15,040 --> 01:37:23,439
George could frugal is who's the EU minister for he here is in fact you know has this project to you know,

831
01:37:23,440 --> 01:37:27,459
to build or rebuild something like a social, social Europe.

832
01:37:27,460 --> 01:37:31,120
And and it's a very difficult exercise.

833
01:37:31,120 --> 01:37:40,239
You know, it's much harder to rebuild than it was probably in historical circumstances to build in the first place.

834
01:37:40,240 --> 01:37:51,490
But allowing those kinds of institutions to run down, you know, is, I think, more than anything else, what has created, you know,

835
01:37:52,090 --> 01:38:03,940
opportunities for extremist extremist politics, because, you know, it's really institutions like, you know, public universities,

836
01:38:05,230 --> 01:38:14,530
a school system that's relatively egalitarian, you know, enterprises that provide public services to everybody,

837
01:38:15,610 --> 01:38:24,440
that represent the idea of a public order but isn't based upon some notion of race or or hierarchy,

838
01:38:25,330 --> 01:38:31,240
but is based upon it is based upon serving the needs of everyone.

839
01:38:31,720 --> 01:38:37,930
And and, you know, I think it was, you know, very understood by the generation,

840
01:38:38,440 --> 01:38:42,849
you know, that created these institutions at the end of the Second World War,

841
01:38:42,850 --> 01:38:47,950
that they were not just operating out of progressive or socialist ideology,

842
01:38:48,400 --> 01:38:56,889
but a recognition that these institutions would be the major safeguard about Europe falling into darkness again.

843
01:38:56,890 --> 01:39:03,040
And, you know, as the memory of those experiences, you know,

844
01:39:04,150 --> 01:39:17,530
became more distant on the one hand and neo liberal ideology more triumphant, you know, those institutions were allowed to to run down.

845
01:39:17,530 --> 01:39:23,200
And and in many European countries and I it seems to me that that was, you know,

846
01:39:23,710 --> 01:39:30,850
a very dangerous choice or maybe it was not even a choice, but an abdication of responsibility.

847
01:39:31,810 --> 01:39:39,709
But it's. You know, but and it's difficult to build them up again in the current fiscal environment.

848
01:39:39,710 --> 01:39:44,750
And as Joe Stiglitz has suggested in his recent book, The Euro,

849
01:39:45,020 --> 01:39:55,220
there's a sense in which the European framework has acted more as a straitjacket on doing that than as a kind of catalyst.

850
01:39:56,240 --> 01:39:59,780
But but George would like to turn this around in a certain way.

851
01:40:00,200 --> 01:40:06,530
And not only George, but there is, I think, a movement to create a new social Europe.

852
01:40:06,680 --> 01:40:13,970
I think that's going to be, of course, that George, together with support of the others, has also helped in emerging social democracy as it is.

853
01:40:15,390 --> 01:40:18,650
Well, I mean, you know, we are entering into it.

854
01:40:18,730 --> 01:40:24,740
What I was expecting I mean, he doesn't think these guys have.

855
01:40:24,950 --> 01:40:30,110
They may pay lip service, but they, in effect, have even continued to hurt.

856
01:40:30,650 --> 01:40:34,110
That would be a discussion also with Anthony, who is very close to that fact.

857
01:40:34,820 --> 01:40:44,330
So maybe that's like part two of our conversation and well that can we thank Rob for a really wonderful.