See all Lex Fridman transcripts on Youtube

Speaker 1

00:00

The following is a conversation with Sagar Anjati. He is a DC-based political correspondent, host of the Rising with Crystal Ball, and host of the Realignment podcast with Marshall Kozlov. He has interviewed Donald Trump 4 times and has interviewed a lot of major political figures and human beings who wield power. He loves policy and loves history, which makes him a great person to sail through the sometimes stormy waters of political discourse.

Speaker 1

00:32

He showed up to this conversation with a gift of the second volume of Ian Kershaw's biography on Hitler, a two-volume set that is widely acknowledged as 1 of the greatest, if not the greatest, most definitive studies of Hitler. Nothing wins my heart faster on a first meeting or a first date than a great book about the darkest aspects of human nature and human history. I think I started saying that as a joke, but actually there's probably a lot of truth to it. I love it when we skip the small talk and go straight to the in-depth conversation about the best and worst of human nature.

Speaker 1

01:08

Quick mention of our sponsors, Jordan Harbinger Show, Grammarly Grammar Assistant, 8 Sleep Self-Cooling Bed, and Magic Spoon Low Carb cereal. Click the sponsor links to get a discount and to support this podcast. As a side note, let me say that for better or for worse, I would like to avoid the trap of surface political bickering of the day. I do find politics fascinating, but not the talking points produced by the industrial engagement complex of red vs.

Speaker 1

01:37

Blue division. Instead, I'm fascinated by human beings who seek power, and how power changes them. I don't have a political affiliation, and my ideas, at least I hope so, are defined more by curiosity and learning in the face of uncertainty, and less by the echo chambers who tell me what I'm supposed to think. I'm constantly evolving, learning, and doing my best to do so without ego and with empathy.

Speaker 1

02:04

Please be patient with me. As far as I'm aware, I do not have any derangement syndromes nor do I get a medical prescription of blue, red, white, or black pills. If I say something, I say it because I'm genuinely thinking and struggling with the ideas. I have no agenda, just a bit of a hope to add more love to the world.

Speaker 1

02:26

If you enjoy this thing, subscribe on YouTube, review it on Apple Podcasts, follow on Spotify, support it on Patreon, or connect with me on Twitter at Lex Friedman. And now, here's my conversation with Sagar Anjati. There's no better gifts in this world than a book about Hitler, So thank you so much. I've gotten a gift when I was, what was you talking about?

Speaker 1

02:49

Flying the watch from Joe Rogan, and this almost beats it. So tell me what this particular book on Hitler is. So this is volume 2.

Speaker 2

03:00

Yes, so this is Ian Kershaw. He wrote the famous 2 volume on Hitler. I'm a big book nerd, and I spend a lot of time reading biographies in particular.

Speaker 2

03:09

So this 1, if you need a 1 volume, Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, right? I think you talked about that, William Shire, because that's like Hitler's rise, Nazi Germany, the war, et cetera. But I like bios because it's the, a good biography is story of the times, right? And so this 1, the first volume, it does exactly that, which is that it doesn't just tell the story of Hitler.

Speaker 2

03:30

It's the context of poor, you know, this kid in Austria and he's got all these dreams, but then actually pretty courageous in terms of World War 1, right? Gets pinned a medal on by the Kaiser and then what it's like to have to lose World War 1 and actually like lose this, this stain and then the rise within, everybody knows that story, the Beer Hall Putsch and all that. This 1 I like, and the reason I like Kershaw is obviously number 1, it's English, which is actually hard, right? Like in order to write that story, who can do both the primary source material and then translate it for people like us.

Speaker 2

04:03

But he tells the dynamic story of Hitler so well in the second volume, just like the level of detail. And you've talked about this, Lex, like what was it like inside that room inside with Chamberlain? Like what was it like in terms of who was this like magnetic madman who did convince the smartest people in the world at the time? And you know, up until like 1940, the Soviet gamble, like was it Trump, He took tremendous risks, but like highly calculated, thinking, no, no, no, no, I'm not gonna pay for this 1.

Speaker 2

04:36

I'm not gonna pay for this 1. And it put himself, he had a remarkable ability, not just to put himself in the minds of the German people, but in terms of his adversaries. Like with when he was a cross for Mussolini, Calculate, he's like, how exactly did Mussolini, the guy who created fascism, becomes like second fiddle to Hitler? Think it's an amazing bio.

Speaker 2

04:53

And yeah, like Ian Kershaw, along with Richard Evans, 2 of my favorite authors on the Third Reich, no question.

Speaker 1

05:00

Do you think he was born this way, that charisma, whatever that is, or was it something he developed strategically? That's like the question you apply to some of the great leaders. Was he just a madman who had the instinct to be able to control people when in the room together with them?

Speaker 1

05:16

Or is this like he worked at it?

Speaker 2

05:17

I think he worked at it. And, but also there is an innate quality. I'm forgetting his name, his lifelong, Rudolf, the 1 who flew to Berlin in like 1940.

Speaker 2

05:28

I forget

Speaker 1

05:28

his name.

Speaker 2

05:28

Anyway, so he helped Hitler write Mein Kampf and he was like slavishly devoted to him in prison. This is 1925 or something like that. And so you read that and you're like, well, how does he get this like crank wacko to basically believe he's like the second coming, help him write this book?

Speaker 2

05:46

I mean, literally, they live together in the prison cell and they wake up every day. And as he was composing Mein Kampf and because of the Beer Hall Putsch and all that, had this like absolute ability to gather people around him. I think his greatest skill was, is he was just a very good politician, truly. I mean, if you look at his ability in order to read coalitional politics and then convince exactly the right people in order to follow him, I think I heard you ask this once and I've thought about it a lot, which is like, who could have stopped Hitler in Germany, right?

Speaker 2

06:17

It's always like the ever-present question. Of course, like the whole baby Hitler thing. Really, the answer is Hindenburg. Like Hindenburg was the person who could have stopped and had the immense standing within the German public.

Speaker 2

06:27

The only real like war hero, definitely was personally skeptical of fascism and Nazism. And didn't like Hitler. And didn't like him. And he knew he was full of shit.

Speaker 2

06:38

He was like, yeah, I think this guy is dangerous. I think this guy could do a lot of damage to the Republic. But he acceded basically to Hitler at the time. And I think that he was 1 of the main people who could have done something about it.

Speaker 1

06:50

And also he was able to convince the generals, the military, I mean, that was very interesting. And to convince Chamberlain and the other political leaders. That's something I often think about because we're just reading books about these people.

Speaker 1

07:06

I think about with like Jeffrey Epstein, for example. Like evil people, not evil, but people have done evil things. Let's not go to the Dan Carlin thing of what is evil. People that do evil things, I wonder what they're like in a room because I know quite a lot of intelligent people that did not see the evil in Jeffrey Epstein and spend time with him and were not bothered by it.

Speaker 1

07:37

In the same sense, Hitler, it seems like he was able to get, just even before he had power, because people get intoxicated by power and so on. They want to be close to power. But even before he had power, he was able to convince people and it's unclear, is there something that's more than words? It's like the way you, I mean, people talk, tell stories about this piercing look and whatever, all that kind of stuff.

Speaker 1

08:06

I wonder if that's somehow a part of it. Like that has to be the base floor of any of these charismatic leaders. You have to be able to, in a room alone, be able to convince anybody of anything.

Speaker 2

08:20

So I can tell you from my personal experience, 1 of the best educated lessons I got was when I got to meet Trump. So I interviewed Trump 4 different times as a journalist, spent like 2 and a half hours with him in the Oval Office, not alone, but like me and 1 person and like the press secretary, and that was it. So I actually got to observe him.

Speaker 2

08:42

And as a guy who reads these types of books, right? And you know, you think of Trump, obviously most people, what they see on television, in articles and more, but being able to observe it like one-on-one, I was closer to him than I am right now from you. That was 1 of the most educational experiences I got because it's like you just said, the look, the leaning forward, the way he talks, the way he is a master at taking the question and answering exactly which part he wants. And then if you try and follow up, He's like, excuse me, you know, like he knows.

Speaker 2

09:18

And then whenever you're talking, it's not that he's annoyed about getting interrupted. If he realizes he's been marandering and then you interrupt him, all good. But if he's driving home a point, which he has to make sure appears in your transcript or whatever, It's like, it really was fascinating for me to look at. And what was also crazy with Trump is I realized how much he was living in the moment.

Speaker 2

09:42

So like when I went to the Oval, I've read all these biographies and like I walk in and I'm like, holy shit. You're like, I'm in the Oval Office.

Speaker 1

09:50

Well, you interviewed him in the Oval Office.

Speaker 2

09:52

In the Oval, every time, was in the Oval Office. You scared shitless,

Speaker 1

09:54

sorry to say.

Speaker 2

09:55

Well, I wasn't scared, I was just, look, it's the Oval Office, right? I mean, I'm this nerd, he was like this kid. I'm so, I will admit this here.

Speaker 2

10:04

Like I printed out on my dad's label maker when I was like 7 and I wrote like the Oval Office on my bedroom. So I was like, you know, a huge nerd, like obviously egomaniacal even from 7. But So like for this, I mean, it was huge, right? I'm like this 25 year old kid.

Speaker 2

10:18

And like, I walk in there and I see the couch, right? And I'm like, oh man, like that's Kissinger. Like, you know, I'm like, that's where like Kissinger and Nixon got on their knees. And then you see over by the door and you're like, are the scuff marks still there from when Eisenhower used to play golf.

Speaker 2

10:32

You know, this is all running through my mind. With Trump, none of it was there. None of it, right?

Speaker 1

10:36

So like,

Speaker 2

10:37

even the desk, I put my phone on the desk to record,

Speaker 1

10:40

and

Speaker 2

10:40

I'm like, this is the fucking Resolute desk. Like, I shouldn't put my phone on this thing. And I'm like, HMS Resolute, you know, all that, you know, national.

Speaker 2

10:49

And even for him, he doesn't think about any of it. It was like amazing to me. Like he had this portrait of Andrew Jackson right next to his, to the, I think from on the fireplace, like right here on the right. And the most revealing question was when I was like, Mr.

Speaker 2

11:02

President, what are people gonna remember you for in a hundred years? And he was like, I don't know, like veterans choice. He like has a list in front of him of like his accomplishments, which is staff. Good question

Speaker 1

11:14

by the way.

Speaker 2

11:14

Yeah, well, I mean, that's what I wanted to know. And he's like, veterans choice. And I remember looking at him being like, it's not gonna be better.

Speaker 2

11:21

You know, I'm like, I'm looking at you, Donald Trump, the harbinger of something new. We still don't know what the hell it is. And so I realized with these guys and their charisma and more is that they don't think about themselves the way that we think about them. And that was actually important to understand because a lot of people are like, Trump is playing all this chess.

Speaker 2

11:41

I'm like, I assure you, he's not. Like he's truly, 1 time I was interviewing him and he had like a certificate that he had to sign or something on his desk. He's like, it was like child almost like he got distracted by the, he's like, Oh, what's this? You know, it's just like picking it up.

Speaker 2

11:54

And I was like, wow, like this, this is the guy like, this is what he is.

Speaker 1

11:59

Well, I wonder if there was a different person because you were recording than offline at a bar.

Speaker 2

12:05

I can tell you. Well, here's the thing though, because that's another part of it, because that 2 hours, I would say like half of that was not on the record. So like whenever he's off the record, he changes completely, Right?

Speaker 2

12:18

I don't wanna like go into too much of it or whatever, but like he, I mean, he is so mindful of when that camera is on and when the mic is hot in terms of the language that he uses, what he's willing to admit, what he's willing to talk about, how he's willing to even appear in front of his staff. I think the most revealing thing Trump ever did was there was this press conference like right after he lost the right after the midterm elections in 2018. And 1 of the journalists was like, Mr. President, thank you for doing this press conference.

Speaker 2

12:50

And he looks at him and he goes, it's called Earn Media. It's worth billions. And he just like had so much disdain for him because he's like, I'm not doing this for you. He's like, I'm doing this for me.

Speaker 1

13:00

So he's really aware of the narratives and story. I mean, people have talked about that all comes from the tabloid media from New York and so on. He's a master of that.

Speaker 1

13:10

But I've also heard stories of just in private, he's a really, I don't want to overuse the word charismatic, but just like, he is a really interesting, almost like friendly, like a good person. Like that's what I heard, I've heard actually surprising the same thing about Hillary Clinton. And like- That

Speaker 2

13:32

I can't tell you anything about.

Speaker 1

13:35

But like the way they present themselves is perhaps very different than they are as human beings, a one-on-one. That's something, maybe that's just like a skill thing. Maybe the way they present themselves in public is actually their, I mean, almost their real self.

Speaker 1

13:55

And they're just really good in private, one-on-one, to go into this mode of just being really intimate in some kind of human way.

Speaker 2

14:03

I think that's part of it. Because I would notice that with Trump, you know, he's like, it's almost like a tour guide. It was very like, it's very crazy, right?

Speaker 2

14:11

Because you're like, you're in the Oval. I mean, it's his office. And he's like, do you guys want anything? He's like, you want a Diet Coke?

Speaker 1

14:16

Because he

Speaker 2

14:17

drinks like all this Diet Coke. You know? And then he's just like, he's

Speaker 1

14:22

like, you guys want

Speaker 2

14:22

a Diet Coke? Right. And you're sitting there and you're like, the way he's able to like, like the last time I interviewed him, he wanted to do it outside because he studied himself from all angles and he knows exactly how he looks on a camera and with which lighting.

Speaker 2

14:39

And so we were supposed to interview him on camera in the Oval Office, which is actually rare. Like you don't usually get that. And they ended up moving it outside at the last minute. And he came out and he's like, I picked this spot for you.

Speaker 2

14:50

He's like, great lighting. I was like, you are your own lighting director and president. Right? It's great.

Speaker 2

14:57

It's so funny. But it's like you said, he's very charismatic and friendly. I mean, you wouldn't know. I mean, look, this is what I mean in terms of the dynamism of these people that gets lost.

Speaker 2

15:10

And I think even he knows that. Like, I don't think he would want that side of him that I see, you know, that you've seen those off the record moments and more in order to come out, because he's very keen about how exactly he presents to the public. It's like, you know, even his presidential portrait, everybody usually smiles and he refused to smile. He was like, I want to look like Winston Churchill.

Speaker 2

15:30

You know, like even he knew that.

Speaker 1

15:31

Do you think he believes that he, what he kind of implies that he is 1 of, if not the greatest presidents in American history? Like people kind of laugh at this, but there's quite, I mean, there's quite a lot of people, first of all, that make the argument that he's the greatest president in history. Like, I've heard this argument being made.

Speaker 1

15:53

And I mean, I don't know what the, first of all, I don't care, like, you can't make an argument that anyone is the greatest. That's just, I come from a school of like being humble and modest and so on. It's like even Michael, you can't have that conversation. Okay, so I like that he's humble enough to say like Abraham Lincoln and whatever.

Speaker 2

16:18

Like, I don't know. He says maybe Lincoln.

Speaker 1

16:19

Maybe. Remember that.

Speaker 2

16:20

He says maybe Lincoln. Do you

Speaker 1

16:23

think he actually believes that or is that something he understands will create news and also perhaps more importantly, piss off a large number of people. Is he almost like a musician masterfully playing the emotions of the public? Or does he, or and Does he believe when he looks in the mirror, I'm 1 of the greatest men in history?

Speaker 2

16:49

Combination of all 3. I do think he believes it. And for the reason why is I don't think he knows that much about US history.

Speaker 2

16:55

I really mean that. And that's what I meant whenever I was in there and I realized he was just Living in the moment. I don't think he knew all that much about why I mean, this is why was elected in many ways, right? So I'm not I'm not saying this is a Norbert like I'm not making a judgment with on this I'm just saying I do think in his mind He does think he was 1 of the best Presidents in American history largely because and I encountered this a lot of people work for him which is that they didn't really know all that much kind of about what came before and all that.

Speaker 2

17:25

And it's not necessarily to hold it against them because for in many ways, that's what they were elected to do or elected to be in many ways.

Speaker 1

17:32

It's an interesting question whether knowing history, being a student of history is productive or counterproductive. I tend to assume I really respect people who are deeply like well-read in history, like presidents that are almost like nerd, history nerds, I admire that. But maybe that gets in the way.

Speaker 2

17:55

Well, it's, well.

Speaker 1

17:56

Of governance, I don't know. It's not, it's not, you know, I'm just sort of playing devil's advocate to my own beliefs, but it's possible that focusing on the moment and the issues and letting history, it's like first principles thinking, forget the lessons of the past and just focus on common sense reasoning through the problems of today. Yeah, it's really hard question.

Speaker 2

18:18

In terms of the modern era, I mean, Obama was a student of history. Like he used to have presidential biographers and people over and I mean, famously, like Robert A. Carrow, 1 of my favorite presidential biographers, he was invited to have dinner with Obama.

Speaker 2

18:32

And Obama would like pepper some of his, every time, it was interesting, because he'd try and justify some of the things he didn't do by being like, well, if you look at what they had to do and what I have to deal with, mine's much harder. So in that way, I was a little pissed off because I'd be like, no, that actually, like you're comparing apples to oranges and all that. But if you look at Roosevelt, Teddy Roosevelt in particular, this was, I mean, a voracious reader, not of just American history, all history. He wrote- That

Speaker 1

18:59

guy's just such a badass. Jesus.

Speaker 2

19:01

Incredible. The only president who willed himself to greatness, that's like the amazing thing about him. He wasn't tested by a crisis, right? Like it wasn't, he didn't have the Civil War, he didn't have World War II, he didn't have to found the country, literally, or like, you know, didn't have to stave off that, or he didn't buy the Louisiana Purchase, like all that.

Speaker 2

19:20

He literally came into a pretty static country, and he could have just governed with, I mean, the person who came before him was assassinated. Like he easily could have coasted, but he literally willed the country into something more. And that's always why I focus a lot on him too. Because I'm like that in many ways, I wouldn't say it's easy to be great during crisis.

Speaker 2

19:44

I mean, Like look at Trump, right? But it can bring out the best within you, but it's a whole other level to bring out the best within yourself just for the sake of doing it. And that's, I think is really interesting.

Speaker 1

19:56

The speeches were amazing. I'm also a sucker for great speeches because I tend to see the role of the president as in part like inspirer and chief, sort of to be able to, I mean, that's what great leaders do, like CEOs of companies and so on, establish a vision, a clear vision, and like hit that hard. But the way you establish the vision isn't just like, not to dig at Joe Biden, but like sleepy, boring statements.

Speaker 1

20:29

You have to sell those statements and you have to do it in a way where everybody's paying attention, everybody's excited. And that, Teddy Roosevelt was definitely 1 of them. Obama was, I think, at least early on, I don't know, was incredible at that. It does feel that the modern political landscape makes it more difficult to be inspirational in a sense because everything becomes bickering and division.

Speaker 1

20:55

I do want to ask you about Trump. You're now a successful podcaster. I've talked to Joe about Trump, Joe Rogan, and Joe's not interested in talking to Trump, which is fascinating. I try to dig into like why.

Speaker 1

21:14

Yeah. What would you interview Trump on like realignment for example, and do you think it's possible to do A23 hour conversation with him where you will get at something like human or you get at something, like we were talking about the facade he puts forward. Do you think you could get past that?

Speaker 2

21:37

No, I don't. I look, I was a White House correspondent. I observed this man very closely.

Speaker 2

21:45

I interviewed him. I think if that mic is hot, he knows what he's doing. He just, he's done this too long, Lex. He just knows.

Speaker 1

21:52

But do you think he's a different human now after the election? Do you think that?

Speaker 2

21:57

Yeah, not at all. I don't, I think He's been the same person since 1976. I really do.

Speaker 2

22:03

Like basically 1976. I studied Trump a lot and I think he's basically been the core of who he is and elements of that. Ever since he built that, you know, the ice rink in Central Park and got that media attention, that was it.

Speaker 1

22:19

Yeah, he's a fascinating study. I still, I feel there's a hope in me that there would be a podcast like Joe Rogan, like a long-form podcast where something could be, you know, and you're actually a really good person to do that, where you can have a real conversation that looks back at the election and reveals something honest, but perhaps he's thinking about running again, and so maybe he'll never let down that guard. But like, you know, I just love it when there's this switch in people where you start looking back at your life and wanting to tell stories, like trying to extract wisdom and realizing you're in this new phase of life where like the battles have all been fought.

Speaker 1

23:06

Now you're this old, like former warrior. And now you can tell the stories of that time. And it seems like Trump is still at it. Like the young warrior he is, he's not in the mode of telling stories.

Speaker 2

23:18

You know what I got from Rogan? He's the only president who didn't age while in office. It's true, right?

Speaker 2

23:24

And this is what I mean, because he lives in the moment. Like the job actually aged Obama. I mean, Bush, same thing. Even Clinton, Clinton was like fat.

Speaker 2

23:34

He looked miserable by like 2000. HW, like, I mean, Reagan, famous. Actually, yeah, pretty much everybody I think about. Yeah, including John F.

Speaker 2

23:43

Kennedy, who got much sicker while in office. The job like weighs on you and makes you physically ill. Trump was, he's the only person who just, he didn't have to do it.

Speaker 1

23:53

He almost gotten stronger and he was 1 of the most, like the climate, there's so many people attacking him, So much hatred, so much love and hatred. And it was just, I mean, it was whatever it was, it was quite masterful and a fascinating study. If we stick on Hitler for just a minute, what lessons do you take from that time?

Speaker 1

24:19

Do you think it's a unique moment in human history, that World War II, I mean, both Stalin and Hitler, you know, Is it something that's just an outlier in all of human's history in terms of the atrocities or is there lessons to be learned? You mentioned offline that you're not just a student of the entirety of the history, but you're also fascinated by just different policies and stuff. Like what's the immigration policy? What's the policy on science?

Speaker 2

24:53

And- Third Reich in power, let me plug it by Richard Evans, I think is what it was. Cause that actually will tell you, Like what was it like to live under the Nazi regime without the war? Yeah, it's a hard question in terms of the lessons that we can learn.

Speaker 2

25:08

Because there's a lot and it's actually been over, it's been over indexed almost. Everything comes back to Hitler in a conversation. So I kind of think of it within Mao, Stalin, and Hitler as, I don't want to say payments for, but like the end point payment for the sins and the problems of the monarchical system that evolved within Europe, basically like 1400 and more. I basically think that 1400, the wars between the state, you know, wars between France, England, the balance of power, eventually World War I, and then serfdom within Russia, the Russian Revolution that birthed Stalin, same thing, the Kaiser and Imperial Germany and this like incredibly crazy system of balance of power in World War I.

Speaker 2

26:00

And then same thing within China in terms of the warring states and then the disintegration, the European, you know, how this is how they think of it, you know, which is like the century of humiliation and they had to have something like this. I think of it, I try to think of it within the context of that. I don't want to think of, I don't want to sound like an inevitable list But I think of it as I like to think about systems, especially in here in DC That's where I got into politics, which is that? You have to understand systems of power and the incentives within systems and the disincentives the downside risk of what your purpose of what you're creating because it that is what leads and creates the behavior within that system.

Speaker 2

26:43

I was just talking to my girlfriend about this yesterday. It's kind of funny, like, I read these, I'm obsessed with these books by Robert Caro, the biographies of Lyndon Johnson. He's written like 5,000 pages so far and it's still not done. Okay, so like these are, these are like books I base my life on.

Speaker 2

26:59

And Look, these are Washington and the story of the post New Deal era and forward. Not much has changed. Like the Senate is still the Senate. So many of the same problems with the Senate are still there.

Speaker 2

27:12

In some cases, no, not anymore. But for a while, some of the people who were there with Johnson are actually still. 1 of them is the president of the United States, just a joke. And you think about also, same with the media relationship, right?

Speaker 2

27:26

Like there's this media, they may have come and gone, like the people who were in the media and who were cozy with the administration officials. I mean, they just recreated themselves. It's like this. It's like an ecosystem which doesn't change.

Speaker 2

27:40

And that's why I'm like, oh, it's not. That was a specific time. That's just D.C. Like that is D.C.

Speaker 2

27:49

Because of the way the system is architected. It's pretty much been that way since like 1908 whenever like you know Teddy Roosevelt was dining with these journalists and he would yell at them and then he would go over to the society house. And like, in many ways, that's now, instead of going to Henry Adams's house, like the people are congregating in Calorama, which is the richest neighborhood here, at somebody else's house. Like, it's the same thing.

Speaker 2

28:14

So You have to think about the system and then the incentives within that system about what the outcomes that they're producing if you actually wanna think about how can I change this from the outside? That's also why it's very difficult to change because the system is designed in order to produce actually pretty specific outcomes that can only be changed in extraordinary times.

Speaker 1

28:34

Yeah, it's sometimes hard to predict what kind of outcomes will result from the incentive, the system that you create, right? In the case, because especially when it's novel kind of situations, Trump actually created a pretty novel situation and a lot of the things that we've seen in the 20th century were very novel systems where people were very optimistic about the outcomes, right? And then it turned out to not have the results that they predicted.

Speaker 1

29:04

In terms of things being unchanged for the past 100 years and so on, can you, Wikipedia style, or maybe in a musical form, like, I'm only a bill, describe to me.

Speaker 2

29:18

I still sing that to my head sometimes.

Speaker 1

29:20

I'm just a bill. I don't know what the rest of the song is, but let's leave that to people's imagination. How does this whole thing work?

Speaker 1

29:32

How does the US political system work? The 3 branches is, how do you think about the system we have now? If you were to try to describe, if aliens showed up and asked you, like they didn't have time, so this is an elevator thing. Should we destroy you as you plead to avoid destruction?

Speaker 1

29:55

How would you describe how this thing works?

Speaker 2

29:58

I would say we come together and we pick the people who make our laws. Then we pick the guy who executes those laws and they together pick the people who determine whether they or the president is breaking the law at the most basic level. That's how I would describe it.

Speaker 1

30:17

So

Speaker 2

30:20

the people who make the laws are Congress. The executive is charged with executing the laws as passed by Congress, the branches of government. And the Supreme Court is picked by the president, confirmed by the Senate, which then decides whether you or other people are breaking the law in terms of interpretation of that law.

Speaker 2

30:41

That's basically it. Oh, and they they decide whether those laws are in. They fall within the they fall within the restrictions and the want of the founders as expressed by the Constitution of the United States, which is a set of principles that we came together in 1787. I want to make sure I get this right.

Speaker 2

31:08

1787 and decided that we were going to live the rest of our lives barring a revolution and more. And we've made it 200 and something years under that system.

Speaker 1

31:18

So there's a balance of power that's because you have multiple branches, there's a tension and a balance to it as designed by those original documents. Which is the most dysfunctional of the branches? Which is your favorite?

Speaker 1

31:32

Like in terms of talking about systems and like what's the greatest of concern and what is the greatest source of benefit in your view?

Speaker 2

31:41

The presidency, obviously, well, the presidency is my favorite to study, obviously, because it is the 1 where there's most subject to variable change in terms of the personality involved because of so much power imbued within the executive. The Senate is actually pretty much the same. 1 of the things I love about reading about the Senate and histories of the Senate is you're like, oh yeah, there were always like assholes in the Senate who were doing their thing and filibustering constantly based upon this or that.

Speaker 2

32:15

And then the personalities involved with the Senate haven't mattered as much since like pre-Civil War, right? Like pre-Civil War, you had like Henry Clay and then Daniel Webster and John C. Calhoun, who even in their own way, they represented like larger constituencies and they crafted these like compromises up until the outbreak of the civil war, et cetera. But like post since then, you don't think about like the Titans within the Senate.

Speaker 2

32:42

Most of that is because a lot of the stuff that they had power over has transferred over to the executive. So I'm most interested in really in like power, like where it lies. It's actually pretty, you know, throughout American history, much more used to lie with Congress. Now it's obviously just so imbued within the executive that understanding executive power is, I think, the thing I'm probably most interested in here.

Speaker 1

33:04

Do you think at this point, the amount of power that the president has is corrupting to their ability to lead well? Is this, you know, power corrupts, absolute power corrupts, absolutely? Are we, is there too much power in the presidency?

Speaker 2

33:21

There definitely is. And part of the problem, 1 of the things I try to make come across to people is if you're the president, unless you have a hyper-intentional view of how something must be different in government, your view doesn't matter. So for example, like if you were Trump, let's take Trump even, and even him with a pretty intentional view, he was like, I'm gonna end the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, right?

Speaker 2

33:47

And he came in and he gets these generals in, he's like, I wanna end the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. Oh, and I wanna withdraw these troops from Syria. And they're like, okay, well give us like 6 months. He's like, okay.

Speaker 2

33:57

And this is the thing about Trump, he doesn't realize that it's bullshit. So they're like, he's like, 6 months seems fine. Right, so then 6 months comes and he's like, he's like, so, and then he'll announce it. He'll be like, and we're getting out of Syria, it's great.

Speaker 2

34:10

And then the generals freak out. They're like, whoa, whoa, whoa. We don't have a plan for that. He's like, but you guys told me 6 months.

Speaker 2

34:14

He's like, I don't know. Now we need another 6 months in order to figure this thing out. And by that time, now you're midterms. So now what?

Speaker 2

34:20

Now you gotta run for re-election. So more what I mean by that is, if you don't have a hyper-intentional view about how to change foreign policy, if you don't have a hyper-intentional view about how the Department of Commerce should do its job, they are just going to go on autopilot. So there's, this is part of the problem. When you asked me about the presidency, it's not the presidency itself, like the president himself, which has become too powerful.

Speaker 2

34:43

It's that we have less democratic checks on the people and the systems that are on autopilot. And I would say that basically since 2008, we have voted every single time to disrupt that system, except in the case of 2020 with Joe Biden, and there are a lot of different reasons around why that happened. And in every single 1 of those cases, Obama and Trump, they all failed in order to radically disrupt that. And that just shows you how titanic the task is.

Speaker 2

35:17

And I'm using my language precisely because I don't want to be like deep state and all, but like, obviously there's a deep state.

Speaker 1

35:22

Deep state, I guess, has conspiratorial intentions to it. But so what you're saying is the true power currently lies with the autopilot, aka deep state.

Speaker 2

35:32

Well, but see, it's not, this is the thing too I wanna make clear, because I think people think conspiratorially that they're all coming together to intentionally do something. No, no, no, no, no. They are doing what they know, believe they are right, and don't have real democratic checks within that.

Speaker 2

35:50

And so now they have entire generations of cultures within each of these bureaucracies where they say, this is the way that we do things around here. And That's the problem, which is that we have a culture of within many of these agencies and more. I think the best example for this would be during the Ukraine, you know, gate with Trump and all that, with the impeachment. I don't wanna, I'm not talking about the politics here, but the most revealing thing that happened was when the whistleblower guy, Alexander Vindman, was like, here you have the president departing from the policy of the United States.

Speaker 2

36:26

And I was like, well, let me educate you, Lieutenant Colonel. The President of the United States makes American foreign policy. But it was a very revealing comment because he and all the people within national security bureaucracy do think that. They're like, this is the policy of the United States.

Speaker 2

36:46

We have to do this. That's where things get screwy.

Speaker 1

36:49

Well, listen, for me personally, but also from an engineering perspective, I just talked to Jim Keller, it's just, this is the kind of bullshit that we all hate when you're trying to innovate and design new products. So that's what first principles thinking requires, is we don't give a shit what was done before. The point is, what is the best way to do it?

Speaker 1

37:11

And it seems like the current government, government in general probably, bureaucracies in general, are just really good at being lazy about never having those conversations, and just, it becomes this momentum thing that nobody has the difficult conversations. It's become a game within a certain set of constraints, and they never kind of do revolutionary tasks. But you did say that the presidency is power, but you're saying that more power than the others, but that power has to be coupled with like focused intentionality. Like you have to keep hammering the thing.

Speaker 2

37:48

If you want it done, it has to be done. I mean, and you gotta, you gotta, this is the other part too, which is that it's not just that you have to get it done, you have to pick the hundred people who you can trust to pick 10 people each to actually do what you want. 1 of the most revealing quotes is from a guy named Tommy Corcoran.