February 20, 2024 • 40 mins
Jacob Heilbrunn, author of America Last: The Right's Century-Long Romance with Foreign Dictators, joins us to discuss the history of the right's infautuation with foreign dictators, how nothing Trump says is new and he's regurgitating filth from the past, and how the path could lead to The 2025 Presidential Transition Project.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/is-it-just-me-or-have-we-all-lost-our-minds--5869817/support.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/is-it-just-me-or-have-we-all-lost-our-minds--5869817/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:02):
Is it just me? Or havewe all lost our minds? It's a
question I've been asking myself on repeatfor the last eight years, and I
know I'm not alone in that.Is it the politics, is it the
culture? Or am I just gettingold? Hi? I'm Jennifer Horn and
I'm a former Republican strategist and partyleader turned independent sanity activist. I decided
(00:24):
to do this podcast so we couldexplore these questions. I'll bring experts to
the table from politics and media andculture. We'll have raw, insightful conversations
with the clear goal of getting tothe bottom of it all. One way
or another. We've all lost ourminds, and I hope you'll join us
on the journey to find them again. Hi, this is Jennifer Horn and
(00:46):
you're listening to Is it just me? Or have we all lost our minds?
I'm really excited about our guests thisweek. This is a gentleman that
I have to admit I was notfamiliar with until we booked him for the
show. But you're going to lovethis conversation. It goes to the heart
of what we talk about so oftenhere about. It goes to the heart
(01:07):
of what so many of us areconcerned about when it comes to the rise
of the far right, the MAGAmovement, and in particular they're romance with
foreign dictators. So I'm really excitedto have our guests with us today for
all of you, is going tobe a great conversation. It goes to
the heart of everything that we allas as a team here at the podcast,
(01:32):
have been talking about for so longat this effort that we are engaged
in together to protect the country,to protect democracy from the rise of the
mega movement, from what has beenhappening on the far right, and to
really help us understand the romance thatthe right seems to have with foreign dictators,
apparently not just in our contemporary times, but how it has been seated
(01:57):
in the past and grown from thatpoint. Our guests today is the editor
of The National Interest. It's anaward winning online publication that focuses on things
like defense, national security, foreignaffairs, foreign policies, US politics,
and he is also a senior Fellowat the Atlantic Council and the author of
a very interesting new book that I'mreally excited to have the chance for us
(02:22):
to talk about, call America LastThe Right Century Long romance with foreign dictators.
Jacob Heilbron, thank you so muchfor joining us today. Thank you,
Jennifer. It's great to have youhere, as I'm sure you know
what a timely topic and the pointof your book is. And I would
love for us to kind of startin the past and you know, sort
(02:45):
of take a giant step, youknow, leap into the present. Before
I start that, I just wantto read. This is not my this
is not my writing. I justwant to read and a description, a
part of a description of the book, because I think this perfectly lays the
groundwork for us. Why do DonaldTrump, Chuck her Carlson, and much
of the far right so explicitly admirethe murderous and incompetent Russian dictator Vladimir Putin?
(03:10):
Why is Rond de Santis drawing fromVictor Orban's illiberal politics for his own
policies as governor of Florida, asingle American state that has more than twice
the population of Orbon's entire nation inHungary. In America. Last Jacob Heilbroun,
a highly respected observer of the Americanright, demonstrates, said the infatuation
(03:31):
of American conservatives with foreign dictators thougha though a striking and seemingly inexplicable fact
of our current moment, is nota new phenomenon. It dates back to
the First World War, and itgoes on to get more detailed. But
I just think that kind of captureswhat I really want to focus on,
(03:52):
you know, kind of where itcame from, and then how do we
move forward from here and the damageperhaps that is being done as well.
So Jacob, I'm to ask youto give us that nutshell version of the
past, and then we'll try toget into what we're living with in the
moment. Well, it's springtime forautocracy today, and we see that in
(04:15):
Prime Minister Victor Orbn's Hungary. Wesee it in Russia with Vladimir Putin,
who just murdered his top political opponent, Alexei Navalny. And we see it,
frankly here at home with Donald Trump, who today likened himself to Navalney
in a tweet, arguing that he'sa victim of political persecution at the hands
(04:39):
of avengeful Joe Biden. So wheredoes this all go back to? I
started looking back at the origins ofAmerican conservatism and One of the prominent figures
originally was a man named H.L. Menkin, known as the Sage
of Baltimore, the famous journalist,a analyst of the American language, and
(05:04):
a fiery cultural figure who who isof German American background himself vehemently opposed American
entry into World War One, denouncedthe liberal Woodrow Wilson as a quasi to
talitarian, said that we were goinglied into World War One, and essentially
(05:29):
played a big role in the nineteentwenties in fomenting revisionism about World War One,
arguing that in fact America had assaulteda virtuous Germany and that we never
should have aligned ourselves with democratic GreatBritain. Instead, we should have supported
the authoritarian Kaiser Wilhelm and aligned ourselveswith Prussian militarism so that they could conquer
(05:57):
Central Europe and everything would have beenfinned and dandy and these arguments. Menkin
kept this up through the twenties andthirties. He was a vehement foe of
Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Roosevelt was onthe side of the democracies. He wanted
to aid Great Britain. Starting innineteen thirty nine, World War two begins
(06:20):
in September nineteen thirty nine. However, the right constantly invoked World War One
against him. It's a worthless war. Charles Lindberg said, the British are
going to lose anyway. Why sendthe maid? The America first movement?
Ever? We want to hit myhead on the wall. When I hear
you say that, well that becauseisn't that exactly the question today? Why
(06:44):
send the maid? You know whenwe think about Ukraine. I'll let you
continue. Just that was such astriking, such a striking. The parallels
are ubiquitous because they argued that Jewishfinanciers were responsible for dragging us into these
wars aka George Soros today. Theyargued that British globalists were in Cahud's with
Wall Street, America had known nationalinterests in Europe. And by the way,
(07:12):
what was wrong with Adolf Hitler?He was could be a valuable ally
against Joseph Stalin. And it wasn'tjust Charles Lindbergh who said this. Herbert
Hoover in nineteen thirty eight, aformer president, met with Hitler in the
reich chan Sillery in Berlin. Hadan agreeable meeting walks out a couple days
(07:34):
before the March nineteen thirty eight annexationof Austria and announces it would be a
good thing if the Nazis controlled Centraland Eastern Europe because they could impose the
order that those regions need. Whowrought inn it was my mind. That
blows my mind, especially when wethink about Austria. What disorder were they
(07:56):
living in that was so destructive ordan dangerous? Gets to my other my
other point, which is that wecall them isolationists. Many of them were
not. They were not neutral.They were pro fascists, and that it
was in the Republican Party. It'sit's it's so an isolationist, you know,
it's just an inaccurate reference. Thenit's just off, it's off the
(08:18):
money, it's off the mark completelybecause that I was taught, and I
remember my ninth grade history class isolationismand and how it was, you know,
in the context of the First andSecond World War, and you're saying,
no, they were really isolationists.They were actually straight out pro fascism.
The hardcore was pro fascist. Therewere genuine isolationists on the left and
(08:43):
on the among Republicans, there werepeople who were idealistic and were convinced the
same in Britain, that is thata Second World War would lead to senseless
destruction. Surely there had to bea way to reach an accommodation with Adolf
Hitler. One fact you can reached. Adolf Hitler was intent on a genocidal
(09:03):
war. He was intent on creatingwhat he called living space. But the
Germans in the East, I meanyou talk, he was intent on the
annihilation of the Jews. This wasnot this is not a business transaction.
As Joseph Kennedy and others thought atthe time, you can't just cut a
(09:26):
deal with Adolf Hitler. You can'tjust cut a deal with Vladimir Putin.
These guys have ideological aims and sothis America First movement caused huge but sent
Roosevelt into contortions. I mean,you had the lend Lease. They tried
to block Roosevelt on providing providing financialand military aid to the British. They
(09:52):
said, we should not side withthe democracies. As Roosevelt's own Attorney general
pointed out, and in nineteen fortyaddress, we had our own homegrown fascists.
Harold Ikey's the Secretary of the Interior, absantly naming some of the people
(10:16):
that I talk about in my book. Now, these people are obscure vigors
today, such as Merwin k Hart, who is an extremely wealthy New York
financier. Another was General George vanHorn Moseley, who said the Jews immigrating
to the United States from Germany shouldbe sterilized as soon as they landed on
(10:37):
our shores and called Nazism and Spain'sFranco anti toxins against Bolshevism. So and
these people were testified before Congress,they spoke to mass rallies of thousands of
people around the country. They wereon the front page of the New York
(10:58):
Times, both for what they saidand for being denounced by Roosevelt's lieutenants.
And this was a serious battle.Un Fortunately Roosevelt won. However, what
I've come to realize in writing thisbook America Last, is you can suppress
these sentiments, but you can't reallyextinguish them. They're always going to come
(11:20):
back. And during the Cold War, the Right again cozied up to a
variety of the authoritarians, not justFranco, but they defended, for example,
apartheid in South Africa. In nineteenseven fifty seven, The National Review
wrote a famous editorial by William F. Buckley Junior, saying no African Americans
(11:45):
should not be allowed to vote inthe United States, and Buckley and the
other contributors to the magazine, includingsuch conservative eminences as Russell Kirk, praised
South African apartheid and viewed it asa good thing, and said, you
know, America could be modeled onthis too. It's not a bad model.
(12:05):
And of course we did have anessence of apartheid system in America.
I was just going to say thatexactly, and so think about what that
means. I think, well,the idea that apart that is something that
America could you know, find guidancein, or find structure in, or
something like that. I think thatthat is a concept. And the idea
that William F. Buckley was theone who said it. Who you know
(12:28):
who raised up this idea? Ithink it's going to blow people's minds,
well, you know. Buckley thenmodified his stance. In the nineteen early
nineteen sixties, he said the voteshould be denied to the uneducated in general,
that he would not be accused ofracism, of racism. Well,
(12:50):
so what do we accuse him of? Like, what is that? Now?
It's got it's something worse than elitism. And I don't know what the
right word is, but I thinkwhat it's worth recognizing. I'm not here
to pillary William F. Buckley orthis. I think jam there is to
say the statements. At least,yes, you were on the wrong side
(13:11):
of history, and we don't whenyou look at what's happening today, do
we want to return to that pastof the late nineteen thirties? Is that
really the way we want to go? Where we're going to become a fortress
America? We've seen it turn intoa disaster once before. Do we really
have to go back with Johnald Trump? Is peddling? Is a returned to
(13:37):
these doctrines he's talking about. They'retalking about the great replacement, Right,
We're going to be swamped by minorities. You heard that in the twenties as
well. Then they called it therising tide of color. You I've never
heard that phrase before. Well,there was this should have There was this
famous book written by this man namedLothrop's daughter to prominent Uchi Genesis too,
(14:00):
by the way, also met withHitler in nineteen forty and was a defender
of the Nazi regime. Who whoand this you know? This was he
was a famous man. He touredaround the United States as well, arguing
that we needed a return to Nordicsupremacy in the United States. And in
nineteen twenty four, one hundred yearsago, it's one hundred years now,
(14:22):
Congress passed the Ree Johnson Act,which quashed immigration to the United States from
Southeastern Europe in Eastern Europe, andthe Los Angeles Times called it a front
page piece, a victory or atriumph for Nordic supremacy. So that was
all of these things are nasty thingsfrom the past that mister Trump is trying
(14:48):
to revive. And I think weneed to call him out on it and
point out that all he hasn't inventedany new ideas, he doesn't have any
new policies. He's regurgitating the filthfrom the past and trying to tell us
that it's something beautiful and will putAmerica first. In fact, of course,
(15:09):
it puts American ideals and our interestslast. Well. And when you
talk about the the read Johnson ACCTand you just use the phrase you know,
it's described as being a victory forNordic supremacy. That reminds me immediately
of Trump just a few weeks ago, you know, using for the dirty
the dirtying the blood, I thinkhe said of Americans of America something like
(15:31):
that, which polluting Actually, yes, say it again, paluting the blood,
paluting thank you, which you know. Also, it's really interesting.
I can't help interjecting here. Theother thing that happened in nineteen twenty four
is that the book that Trump wasessentially quoting from Mine Kumpf, was written
(15:52):
in nineteen twenty four as well.That's it's fascinating to me the way that
history is. It's not a reflectionof history. It's like a total reproduction.
It's a total copy of what hasof the history that you remind us
of right now, that you're remindingus of in this conversation right now.
And so so let's jump kind offirmly into the present. Then I'd like
(16:18):
to talk about a couple of differentthings and tell me if I hit on
something that it's just not in yourwheelhouse, or you just don't feel like
it's what you want to focus on. I wanted my position of having formerly
been Now I was a member ofthe rn C, I said, on
the executive committee of the Republican NationalCommittee. I was a very I was
very dedicated to what I believed theRepublican principles were. And without getting into
(16:41):
that whole change, you know,everything that's unfolded there, it is.
I never saw the Republican Party asembracing fascism as you know, as you
know, being the repeating the pathof Hitler, and I always took those
comparisons as a political dig you know, as a political strategy from people who
(17:02):
were on the left as opposed tothe right. But as I have you
know, had the chance to startreading your book and listen, do you
talk about it? It is it'sfascinating to me that it's true. Like
it's right. What you're suggesting ishistorically factual. It's not politically or principally
in principle what I saw the RepublicanParty or what I believe the Republican Party
(17:26):
was, But as I see wherethat party is today there, I don't
know how you can deny it.There's no question. So is the point
behind the book to be informed,to be knowledgeable, or is it really
intended to be a warning, andto be is it very directly a watch
out for Trump messet. It's awarning we do not need to go down
(17:49):
this road again. As far asthe Republican Party is concerned, what we're
witnessing today is a tradition within thepark. It is not the tradition.
Parties, as you know, areup for grabs. And there has always
been an Eastern establishment in the RepublicanParty that has been vilified by the heartland.
(18:17):
The Republican Party has been riven bythese disputes ever since the Mugwumps,
Theodore Roosevelt, and we go intothe nineteen By the way, the mugwumps
love it is a good word.That's a great word. So what the
base, so to speak, hasalways recoiled at the elites. And in
(18:37):
nineteen forty this came to ahead.There was a July convention in Philadelphia and
Wendell Wilkie ended up getting getting anointed. And he was a globalist. But
you know, the party throughout theCold War II, you look the William
F. Buckley wing much more aggressive. They want to roll back communism.
(19:00):
In fact, Dwight Eisenhower's greatest detractorswere inside the Republican Party, Joseph mccarth
Senator Joseph McCarthy and the National Reviewsegment that issues in the very Goldwater candidacy
in nineteen sixty four. The radicalright has always been requesting for dominance over
(19:22):
the GOP. Nineteen ninety two inHouston, Patrick j Uchannon pretty much torpedoes
George W. Bush's convention with thatcrazy speech saying we will take our country
back block by block. Pat Uchannanran on America first in the nineteen nineties.
(19:42):
He denounced free trade, he denouncedIsrael, he said we shouldn't be
in NATO, and when Vladimir Putincame into power, he hailed him as
the greatest thing since slice bread.Putin is a true leader, a defender
of Christianity, He's anti gay,he represents everything that we Republicans should stand
(20:03):
for. So this tradition, Iwish it had not triumphed with Donald trum
But right now they have a strangleholdon the Republican Party. It's an amazing
reversal of fortune. These guys wereon the margins for decades. They were
(20:29):
dismissed as the fringe, as koops, and now they dominate. They seized
control of the Republican Party. Andyou know, my life in the Republican
Party is all in the state ofNew Hampshire, a moderate state, a
very purple state. You know,the Republicans tend to hold at this point
at least they hold the state officesand the Democrats are holding the federal offices.
(20:52):
But the party itself was more moderatebefore I got involved, before I
joined, and during my time asyou know, as a can as a
chairman, all the different things,trying to hold trying to hold fast to
the idea that the party could bemoderate, it could could be conservative without
being crazy, was where my headwas in it at that time. Like
(21:15):
that, I was convinced that thesegment of the party, the people,
the principles that you're talking about rightnow, represented the fast minority. And
I could say to the left,there was this minority way off to the
left that was destructive in other ways, either I completely miscalculated it or it
has just dramatically grown and changed inthe last you know, since my you
(21:37):
know, my days eight or tenyears now, you know, since I
was in that role. And that'swhy I want to ask you, what
is your perception of it or youridea of it. It has Donald Trump,
because I have a pretty strong opinionabout this the answer to this question.
Has Donald Trump taken over the partyand you know kind of you know,
laid out this position, this messageand somehow vincent all to join in.
(22:02):
Or was the party just waiting forDonald Trump? You know where they're
the people in the party just waitingfor Trump to come along and give them
that voice. I think ultimately youhave to blame the party. It's receptive
to someone like Trump. Trump hasbeen very consistent in his views. He
gave an interview and Playboy in nineteenninety in which he said that we're being
(22:26):
laughed at around the world, thatJapan and Germany are taking us to the
cleaners. It's all this same andyou know, h Ross Perrout, wasn't
that different from Trump? Patrick Buchanan. Trump's gift has been that he has
finally found the one product that hecan sell, authoritarianism. All of his
(22:48):
other businesses have actually gone bankrupt.But data to State of New York now
too. Yes, imagine what thatmust do to his brain that he has
been picked out of doing business inthe State of New York. That must
be making his brain wild right now. Not that we want to get into
these mental illness issues, but that'sa whole different story. Yeah, and
(23:11):
we'll see what the extent of hisof his financial resources are parental right now.
Yep. Absolutely. Actually, youknow, I don't mean to sound
pessimistic because I continue to believe thatwhat Trump is selling in this election is
not a winning message. I donot believe. I'm not convinced that the
majority of Americans want an authoritarian asa leader. Yeah, I agree with
(23:37):
that completely. Trump is really pushingit both in his in his statements.
He seems to becoming increasingly strident,and I would suggest, you know,
more and more obviously unbalanced, whichseems like such a such a mild term
for what I think he really is. But his strident stridency is strident nature.
(24:03):
The stridentness of what is of howpower he's expressing himself lately, I
think is a reflection of that too. And I think that he has personal
fear about where he's going. Ithink a lot of what Donald Trump is
is both his base in both hisown fear and his knowledge that he can
ignite fear in others. That's howhe you know, creates this influence and
this you know, is able toadvance his message, I think to some
(24:26):
degree that to the degree that hedoes so we use mentioned early on alexiing
Evoli and the tragedy of his death, which I think was just three or
four days ago now from when we'respeaking, and in approximately the same timeframe,
maybe just before that, I can'tremember, before or after Linda Graham
it made it clear that he wasgoing to be opposing future you know,
(24:48):
any Eddie for any further aid toUkraine, which is of course for him
a complete turnaround from you know,his position throughout his entire life is you
know, the the partnership that hehad with John McCain that you know,
he's always positioned himself as a voicefor democracy and supporting the importance of supporting
our friends around the world. Andto see that happen at the same time
(25:10):
that Navale died, there's I don'tknow if I can even exactly express what's
in my head, but there's aconnection there to me there, you know,
it's it's like Lindsay is Lindsay Grahamis turning on democracy at this moment
when there are people in Russia willingto give their lives for it. And
what does it mean when we withdrawour support from you know, freedom seekers
(25:32):
like the Ukrainians, like you know, a country, you know, a
country that wants very much to embracethe West, to you know, to
to embrace modern democracy, to looksto the United States for that leadership and
that support and that uplift. Andit seems to me that what we just
saw happen with Graham and Navalney andthe way that I'm sorry, I know,
(25:55):
I'm sound like I'm rambling, probably, and the way that the right
is trying so hard to withdraw supportfor an emerging democracy like that is just
to me, like laying it outas obviously as we can. What the
danger is here? I mean,the right is giving putin permission to do
and be anything he wants, whereverhe wants. How do we fight that?
(26:18):
If this book is a warning andI agree with you, I think
the majority of Americans want to wouldreject the idea of authoritarianism. But Trump
is going to be on the ballotfor president this year. He's going to
be one of or two primary choices. How do we fight that? How
do we defeat it, Well,we need to just to talk openly about
his authoritarian ambitions, and I thinkthat discussion has begun that it's it's not
(26:47):
as though he would enter office withouta blueprint. If you look at the
Heritage Foundation twenty twenty five project,Yeah five twenty twenty five, they have
so explained that for folks. Idon't know if we've discussed that on this
podcast yet, So if you wouldn'tmind just laying it out and brief for
them what heard what twenty twenty fiveis about. Well, it's essentially a
(27:11):
document that explains how Trump can putin loyalists, how he can fire immediately
forty to fifty thousand civil servants andreplace them with his own people, and
how to gut what they call thedeep state, which really means an independent
(27:32):
Justice Department, the FBI, andthe CIA. Trump's ambition will be to
make all of these agencies loyal tohim personally rather than the constitution. Now
why is that? It's because Trump. We talk about democracy a lot,
(27:52):
but what he's really opposed to isthe rule of law. He does not
want to be constricted either in hisfinancial dealings. As we've seen he says
when he gets when he gets convictedin court, he says, or found.
You know, he's penalized. Hesays, it's a rigged system.
No, it's not. It's therule of law. And the same thing
(28:17):
applies to him as president. Hewants to be able to extort foreign governments
on behalf of himself, as hetried with Volodimir Zelensky in Ukraine. He
wants to cut deals with the Saudis, as Jared Kushner has done. He
has already done dollars. So essentiallyyou would have an unleashed president. He's
(28:37):
already said that under his conception ofimmunity, the president could assassinate his political
opponents. Well, who just didthat, Vladimir Putin. So we have
been warned. Anyone who goes intothis election thinking that there's no real difference
between these candidates might want to takea closer look. And it's frightening.
(29:00):
And you're not saying anything that Idon't already know that I'm sure everybody in
our audience audience already knows. Butit's really frightening to hear you lay it
out in exactly the way that youjust did. These what Donald Trump has
said, what Putin has done,what Donald Trump said, what Putin did,
back and forth like that. Andone of the things that I have
expressed concern about on the air andin writing and all, you know,
(29:22):
various platforms, is that my concernis that Americans. I have great faith
in the American people and in theAmerican promise. And I'm not naive.
I understand you know, what theyou know, what the weaknesses of America
has been, what our mistakes havebeen, you know, the damage and
the you know things that you knowthat has occurred in our in our growth
(29:48):
as a democracy. But I worrythat we have lived in a time maybe
it's a relative piece, a timeof relative comfort or while people feel you
know, freak always sort of feellike they're struggling financially, we are living
in a time of relative wealth whenyou look at the numbers, and that
as a result, we have becomelazy defenders of democracy and that you know,
(30:11):
people often talk about how Hitler slowlyjust you know, step by step,
year by year, and then suddenlywe were at this point where we
were in a world war with aguy who was trying to commit genocide against
an entire people. That it wasyou know, a gradual taking over,
gradually bringing people to his side,to his way. I'd worry that sometimes
(30:33):
that we might be on a similarpath that the far right Trump, and
frankly not just the far right dR and C. I listened to Ron,
I listened to you know, allthese other elected party leaders, that
we are just gradually being desensitized tojust how problematic the entire Republican Party approach
(30:53):
to American democracy has become, andthat instead of having a huge uprising of
people, you know, I'd loveto see ninety percent of the vote go
to Biden this ball, but insteadof that that it seems like maybe it's
a trickle, trickle trickle, andin another four years or another eight years,
if we're going to be so muchfarther down, that's gonna be so
(31:15):
much worse that all of a sudden, we're living in a world that's very
different and everyone's gonna be surprised byit. Am I overly concerned? No,
there's good reason to be concerned.I would also say that there is,
there is, there has been,and is a backlash to Trump and
(31:37):
his authoritarian ambitions. You see itin the in the elections that have been
taking place where Democrats have been winningby much wider margins than anyone anticipated.
Yes, Wisconsin, the governor hasnow put out a fair map for the
state legislature. These things can becombated. They require organ tozation. W
(32:00):
Wisconsin obviously has done a phenomenal job. If you just capitulate like Lindsey Graham
and accommodate yourself to what you perceiveto be the new realities, then you
and Bolden Trump he would like toemploy Salami tactics as president, constantly whittling
(32:22):
away at American rights and expanding hisown power. And if people are unwilling
to confront it or to openly saywhat is transpiring, then we're in what
George H. W. Bush oncecalled deep doo doo. George H.
(32:43):
W. Bush the most poetic ofour of our presidents. And it wasn't
an hw who at the convention essentiallyused a phrase like like showed them the
door, Like there's the door ifyou don't like it, you know,
addressing kind of this farther right attemptat influencing the party at that time,
essentially showed them the door at atthe convention, I'm almost certain it was
(33:07):
him. And again that was myadult that was in my adulthood. Like
it is striking to me how faraway that feels now for the way that
the party has changed, the partyhas been changing actually since since nineteen sixty
four. Nixon sort of was ahiatus, I think, and then with
(33:31):
Reagan it starts, it starts totake on a sharper edge. George H.
W. Bush was pilloried by theright wing of the Roblic Party,
all right because for breaking is nonew taxes pledge. But they just didn't
like him anyway. They saw mysoft and cultural issues. His son,
George W. Bush did not makethe same mistake. So what you've basically
(33:53):
seen in the GOP is a constantshift towards the right and an unwillingness.
We haven't talked about New Kingdridge too. He's the bomb throat where in nineteen
ninety four who essentially sets the basisfor blowing up Congress so you no longer
(34:14):
govern. Instead, you go onFox News, you get media hits,
but you're not actually interested in publicpassing legislation, let alone cooperating with your
opposition, who he defined is theenemy. Now that's where we get when
we start talking, which is languagethat was not always traditionally used in politics.
(34:37):
When you start talking about your youradversaries, is enemies, unpatriotic.
You know, we're getting into WeimarRepublic language, where then you talk get
taught. You get Trump talking aboutretribution, about exterminating the vermin who were
first. You know, he's callingpeople, he's talking about humans. He
(35:00):
uses the he uses language to dehumanizehis opponents or the people that he sees
as you know, polluting the blood, the American blood or But and that's
one of the things that I respondto very very strongly in a negative way.
But I also think it's something thatwe see people responding to in the
far right in a very positive manner. They love that language. Now there's
(35:22):
a reason which gets your opening questionabout why people are gravitating towards this.
You think about life in East Germanyor in the East Block for which some
people felt nostalgia. It takes theguess work out of your life. You
know how you're supposed to behave,you know what will what will be rewarded,
(35:45):
what isn't Things are regimented, youdon't have There's there's not too much
need for independent thinking. It's allset out for you. If that's how
you want to live, then Trumpis your man, which is which is
just mind boggling to think about,because when you think about the roots of
(36:06):
America, regardless of what was goodor you know, bad and weak about
it, And you know, wetalk a lot now, you know lately,
I shouldn't even say lately, weshould talk a lot more than we
do about the weaknesses of some ofour founding founding fathers or about the you
know, the impact that slavery continuesto have in our world today. But
what you just said that if youdon't want to have to think for yourself,
(36:27):
if you want it, if youwant life to be intellectually easy,
then you gravitate toward Trump. Butwe were founded on the idea that we
wanted life to be intellectually complicated,that we wanted independent thinking, independent development.
That you know, that was youknow, the basis of liberty and
freedom. And that's a complete rejectthere's a complete rejection of that amongst the
(36:52):
Mega mentality, the Mega movement.I know that I'm getting over my time
with you, so I don't wantto keep you too long. So I'm
going to just ask you a verygeneral question. I think that you have
made some of the most powerful points, or you have expressed these points is
some of the most direct and powerfulways that I've heard in a very long
time. And so I just wantto sort of give you an open floor
(37:14):
and remind people. The book iscalled America Last, the right century long
romance with foreign dictators. We're talkingto the author, talk to me just
kind of give you, like,what is your closing thought? Then I
guess or what do you think isthe most important message that we need people
to get from this conversation? Ithink, other than go buy the book.
(37:39):
One of the reasons I wrote AmericaLast, which I talk about in
the acknowledgments, is because I havea personal familiarity with Germany, and my
mother and father were both born inNazi Germany, and my father emigrated in
nineteen forty to the US. SoI would urge people not to take democracy
(38:06):
for granted. If there's one thingthat Germany shows, this was a highly
advanced industrialized society at the intellectual apexof Europe at the turn of the century,
and the Weimar Republic that emerged afterWorld War One was it was not
(38:30):
doomed. It was a republic withoutenough Republicans in the classical sense, if
you just stand by, as Burkesaid, you know, if good men
do nothing, then evil will prevail. I'm not trying to say that everyone
who supports Trump is evil. I'mjust saying that I would think long and
(38:52):
hard about what I could do totry not only to preserve but also to
protect American democracy at a very dangerousmoment in American history. And that's what
it's all about. That's the coreof it right there. And from my
perspective, you know, I thinkwe have to find a way to make
what you just said preserving, youknow, a democracy at this critical moment
(39:16):
in the life of our nation.We have to find a way to make
it very personal and very clear toall Americans, to people as individuals,
so that they look at that andsay, oh, yeah, that's why
I have to speak up. Ihave to be part of it. I
have to have to make sure thatthis does not that this does not succeed,
that neither Trump nor the MAGA movementsucceeds going forward. Fantastic conversation.
(39:42):
I'm really grateful, Jacob that youjoined us. It's Jacob Halbroun and the
book is America Last, the RightCentury Law, Romance with foreign Dictators.
I hope that you will join usagain. We're going to have a lot
of these conversations going forward between nowon election day and I hope we get
the opportunity to speak to you again. Thank you so much for being here.
Thank you, it was wonderful.
Is it just me? Or havewe all lost our minds? It's a
question I've been asking myself on repeatfor the last eight years, and I
know I'm not alone in that.Is it the politics, is it the
culture? Or am I just gettingold? Hi? I'm Jennifer Horn and
I'm a former Republican strategist and partyleader turned independent sanity activist. I decided
(00:24):
to do this podcast so we couldexplore these questions. I'll bring experts to
the table from politics and media andculture. We'll have raw, insightful conversations
with the clear goal of getting tothe bottom of it all. One way
or another. We've all lost ourminds, and I hope you'll join us
on the journey to find them again. Hi, this is Jennifer Horn and
(00:46):
you're listening to Is it just me? Or have we all lost our minds?
I'm really excited about our guests thisweek. This is a gentleman that
I have to admit I was notfamiliar with until we booked him for the
show. But you're going to lovethis conversation. It goes to the heart
of what we talk about so oftenhere about. It goes to the heart
(01:07):
of what so many of us areconcerned about when it comes to the rise
of the far right, the MAGAmovement, and in particular they're romance with
foreign dictators. So I'm really excitedto have our guests with us today for
all of you, is going tobe a great conversation. It goes to
the heart of everything that we allas as a team here at the podcast,
(01:32):
have been talking about for so longat this effort that we are engaged
in together to protect the country,to protect democracy from the rise of the
mega movement, from what has beenhappening on the far right, and to
really help us understand the romance thatthe right seems to have with foreign dictators,
apparently not just in our contemporary times, but how it has been seated
(01:57):
in the past and grown from thatpoint. Our guests today is the editor
of The National Interest. It's anaward winning online publication that focuses on things
like defense, national security, foreignaffairs, foreign policies, US politics,
and he is also a senior Fellowat the Atlantic Council and the author of
a very interesting new book that I'mreally excited to have the chance for us
(02:22):
to talk about, call America LastThe Right Century Long romance with foreign dictators.
Jacob Heilbron, thank you so muchfor joining us today. Thank you,
Jennifer. It's great to have youhere, as I'm sure you know
what a timely topic and the pointof your book is. And I would
love for us to kind of startin the past and you know, sort
(02:45):
of take a giant step, youknow, leap into the present. Before
I start that, I just wantto read. This is not my this
is not my writing. I justwant to read and a description, a
part of a description of the book, because I think this perfectly lays the
groundwork for us. Why do DonaldTrump, Chuck her Carlson, and much
of the far right so explicitly admirethe murderous and incompetent Russian dictator Vladimir Putin?
(03:10):
Why is Rond de Santis drawing fromVictor Orban's illiberal politics for his own
policies as governor of Florida, asingle American state that has more than twice
the population of Orbon's entire nation inHungary. In America. Last Jacob Heilbroun,
a highly respected observer of the Americanright, demonstrates, said the infatuation
(03:31):
of American conservatives with foreign dictators thougha though a striking and seemingly inexplicable fact
of our current moment, is nota new phenomenon. It dates back to
the First World War, and itgoes on to get more detailed. But
I just think that kind of captureswhat I really want to focus on,
(03:52):
you know, kind of where itcame from, and then how do we
move forward from here and the damageperhaps that is being done as well.
So Jacob, I'm to ask youto give us that nutshell version of the
past, and then we'll try toget into what we're living with in the
moment. Well, it's springtime forautocracy today, and we see that in
(04:15):
Prime Minister Victor Orbn's Hungary. Wesee it in Russia with Vladimir Putin,
who just murdered his top political opponent, Alexei Navalny. And we see it,
frankly here at home with Donald Trump, who today likened himself to Navalney
in a tweet, arguing that he'sa victim of political persecution at the hands
(04:39):
of avengeful Joe Biden. So wheredoes this all go back to? I
started looking back at the origins ofAmerican conservatism and One of the prominent figures
originally was a man named H.L. Menkin, known as the Sage
of Baltimore, the famous journalist,a analyst of the American language, and
(05:04):
a fiery cultural figure who who isof German American background himself vehemently opposed American
entry into World War One, denouncedthe liberal Woodrow Wilson as a quasi to
talitarian, said that we were goinglied into World War One, and essentially
(05:29):
played a big role in the nineteentwenties in fomenting revisionism about World War One,
arguing that in fact America had assaulteda virtuous Germany and that we never
should have aligned ourselves with democratic GreatBritain. Instead, we should have supported
the authoritarian Kaiser Wilhelm and aligned ourselveswith Prussian militarism so that they could conquer
(05:57):
Central Europe and everything would have beenfinned and dandy and these arguments. Menkin
kept this up through the twenties andthirties. He was a vehement foe of
Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Roosevelt was onthe side of the democracies. He wanted
to aid Great Britain. Starting innineteen thirty nine, World War two begins
(06:20):
in September nineteen thirty nine. However, the right constantly invoked World War One
against him. It's a worthless war. Charles Lindberg said, the British are
going to lose anyway. Why sendthe maid? The America first movement?
Ever? We want to hit myhead on the wall. When I hear
you say that, well that becauseisn't that exactly the question today? Why
(06:44):
send the maid? You know whenwe think about Ukraine. I'll let you
continue. Just that was such astriking, such a striking. The parallels
are ubiquitous because they argued that Jewishfinanciers were responsible for dragging us into these
wars aka George Soros today. Theyargued that British globalists were in Cahud's with
Wall Street, America had known nationalinterests in Europe. And by the way,
(07:12):
what was wrong with Adolf Hitler?He was could be a valuable ally
against Joseph Stalin. And it wasn'tjust Charles Lindbergh who said this. Herbert
Hoover in nineteen thirty eight, aformer president, met with Hitler in the
reich chan Sillery in Berlin. Hadan agreeable meeting walks out a couple days
(07:34):
before the March nineteen thirty eight annexationof Austria and announces it would be a
good thing if the Nazis controlled Centraland Eastern Europe because they could impose the
order that those regions need. Whowrought inn it was my mind. That
blows my mind, especially when wethink about Austria. What disorder were they
(07:56):
living in that was so destructive ordan dangerous? Gets to my other my
other point, which is that wecall them isolationists. Many of them were
not. They were not neutral.They were pro fascists, and that it
was in the Republican Party. It'sit's it's so an isolationist, you know,
it's just an inaccurate reference. Thenit's just off, it's off the
(08:18):
money, it's off the mark completelybecause that I was taught, and I
remember my ninth grade history class isolationismand and how it was, you know,
in the context of the First andSecond World War, and you're saying,
no, they were really isolationists.They were actually straight out pro fascism.
The hardcore was pro fascist. Therewere genuine isolationists on the left and
(08:43):
on the among Republicans, there werepeople who were idealistic and were convinced the
same in Britain, that is thata Second World War would lead to senseless
destruction. Surely there had to bea way to reach an accommodation with Adolf
Hitler. One fact you can reached. Adolf Hitler was intent on a genocidal
(09:03):
war. He was intent on creatingwhat he called living space. But the
Germans in the East, I meanyou talk, he was intent on the
annihilation of the Jews. This wasnot this is not a business transaction.
As Joseph Kennedy and others thought atthe time, you can't just cut a
(09:26):
deal with Adolf Hitler. You can'tjust cut a deal with Vladimir Putin.
These guys have ideological aims and sothis America First movement caused huge but sent
Roosevelt into contortions. I mean,you had the lend Lease. They tried
to block Roosevelt on providing providing financialand military aid to the British. They
(09:52):
said, we should not side withthe democracies. As Roosevelt's own Attorney general
pointed out, and in nineteen fortyaddress, we had our own homegrown fascists.
Harold Ikey's the Secretary of the Interior, absantly naming some of the people
(10:16):
that I talk about in my book. Now, these people are obscure vigors
today, such as Merwin k Hart, who is an extremely wealthy New York
financier. Another was General George vanHorn Moseley, who said the Jews immigrating
to the United States from Germany shouldbe sterilized as soon as they landed on
(10:37):
our shores and called Nazism and Spain'sFranco anti toxins against Bolshevism. So and
these people were testified before Congress,they spoke to mass rallies of thousands of
people around the country. They wereon the front page of the New York
(10:58):
Times, both for what they saidand for being denounced by Roosevelt's lieutenants.
And this was a serious battle.Un Fortunately Roosevelt won. However, what
I've come to realize in writing thisbook America Last, is you can suppress
these sentiments, but you can't reallyextinguish them. They're always going to come
(11:20):
back. And during the Cold War, the Right again cozied up to a
variety of the authoritarians, not justFranco, but they defended, for example,
apartheid in South Africa. In nineteenseven fifty seven, The National Review
wrote a famous editorial by William F. Buckley Junior, saying no African Americans
(11:45):
should not be allowed to vote inthe United States, and Buckley and the
other contributors to the magazine, includingsuch conservative eminences as Russell Kirk, praised
South African apartheid and viewed it asa good thing, and said, you
know, America could be modeled onthis too. It's not a bad model.
(12:05):
And of course we did have anessence of apartheid system in America.
I was just going to say thatexactly, and so think about what that
means. I think, well,the idea that apart that is something that
America could you know, find guidancein, or find structure in, or
something like that. I think thatthat is a concept. And the idea
that William F. Buckley was theone who said it. Who you know
(12:28):
who raised up this idea? Ithink it's going to blow people's minds,
well, you know. Buckley thenmodified his stance. In the nineteen early
nineteen sixties, he said the voteshould be denied to the uneducated in general,
that he would not be accused ofracism, of racism. Well,
(12:50):
so what do we accuse him of? Like, what is that? Now?
It's got it's something worse than elitism. And I don't know what the
right word is, but I thinkwhat it's worth recognizing. I'm not here
to pillary William F. Buckley orthis. I think jam there is to
say the statements. At least,yes, you were on the wrong side
(13:11):
of history, and we don't whenyou look at what's happening today, do
we want to return to that pastof the late nineteen thirties? Is that
really the way we want to go? Where we're going to become a fortress
America? We've seen it turn intoa disaster once before. Do we really
have to go back with Johnald Trump? Is peddling? Is a returned to
(13:37):
these doctrines he's talking about. They'retalking about the great replacement, Right,
We're going to be swamped by minorities. You heard that in the twenties as
well. Then they called it therising tide of color. You I've never
heard that phrase before. Well,there was this should have There was this
famous book written by this man namedLothrop's daughter to prominent Uchi Genesis too,
(14:00):
by the way, also met withHitler in nineteen forty and was a defender
of the Nazi regime. Who whoand this you know? This was he
was a famous man. He touredaround the United States as well, arguing
that we needed a return to Nordicsupremacy in the United States. And in
nineteen twenty four, one hundred yearsago, it's one hundred years now,
(14:22):
Congress passed the Ree Johnson Act,which quashed immigration to the United States from
Southeastern Europe in Eastern Europe, andthe Los Angeles Times called it a front
page piece, a victory or atriumph for Nordic supremacy. So that was
all of these things are nasty thingsfrom the past that mister Trump is trying
(14:48):
to revive. And I think weneed to call him out on it and
point out that all he hasn't inventedany new ideas, he doesn't have any
new policies. He's regurgitating the filthfrom the past and trying to tell us
that it's something beautiful and will putAmerica first. In fact, of course,
(15:09):
it puts American ideals and our interestslast. Well. And when you
talk about the the read Johnson ACCTand you just use the phrase you know,
it's described as being a victory forNordic supremacy. That reminds me immediately
of Trump just a few weeks ago, you know, using for the dirty
the dirtying the blood, I thinkhe said of Americans of America something like
(15:31):
that, which polluting Actually, yes, say it again, paluting the blood,
paluting thank you, which you know. Also, it's really interesting.
I can't help interjecting here. Theother thing that happened in nineteen twenty four
is that the book that Trump wasessentially quoting from Mine Kumpf, was written
(15:52):
in nineteen twenty four as well.That's it's fascinating to me the way that
history is. It's not a reflectionof history. It's like a total reproduction.
It's a total copy of what hasof the history that you remind us
of right now, that you're remindingus of in this conversation right now.
And so so let's jump kind offirmly into the present. Then I'd like
(16:18):
to talk about a couple of differentthings and tell me if I hit on
something that it's just not in yourwheelhouse, or you just don't feel like
it's what you want to focus on. I wanted my position of having formerly
been Now I was a member ofthe rn C, I said, on
the executive committee of the Republican NationalCommittee. I was a very I was
very dedicated to what I believed theRepublican principles were. And without getting into
(16:41):
that whole change, you know,everything that's unfolded there, it is.
I never saw the Republican Party asembracing fascism as you know, as you
know, being the repeating the pathof Hitler, and I always took those
comparisons as a political dig you know, as a political strategy from people who
(17:02):
were on the left as opposed tothe right. But as I have you
know, had the chance to startreading your book and listen, do you
talk about it? It is it'sfascinating to me that it's true. Like
it's right. What you're suggesting ishistorically factual. It's not politically or principally
in principle what I saw the RepublicanParty or what I believe the Republican Party
(17:26):
was, But as I see wherethat party is today there, I don't
know how you can deny it.There's no question. So is the point
behind the book to be informed,to be knowledgeable, or is it really
intended to be a warning, andto be is it very directly a watch
out for Trump messet. It's awarning we do not need to go down
(17:49):
this road again. As far asthe Republican Party is concerned, what we're
witnessing today is a tradition within thepark. It is not the tradition.
Parties, as you know, areup for grabs. And there has always
been an Eastern establishment in the RepublicanParty that has been vilified by the heartland.
(18:17):
The Republican Party has been riven bythese disputes ever since the Mugwumps,
Theodore Roosevelt, and we go intothe nineteen By the way, the mugwumps
love it is a good word.That's a great word. So what the
base, so to speak, hasalways recoiled at the elites. And in
(18:37):
nineteen forty this came to ahead.There was a July convention in Philadelphia and
Wendell Wilkie ended up getting getting anointed. And he was a globalist. But
you know, the party throughout theCold War II, you look the William
F. Buckley wing much more aggressive. They want to roll back communism.
(19:00):
In fact, Dwight Eisenhower's greatest detractorswere inside the Republican Party, Joseph mccarth
Senator Joseph McCarthy and the National Reviewsegment that issues in the very Goldwater candidacy
in nineteen sixty four. The radicalright has always been requesting for dominance over
(19:22):
the GOP. Nineteen ninety two inHouston, Patrick j Uchannon pretty much torpedoes
George W. Bush's convention with thatcrazy speech saying we will take our country
back block by block. Pat Uchannanran on America first in the nineteen nineties.
(19:42):
He denounced free trade, he denouncedIsrael, he said we shouldn't be
in NATO, and when Vladimir Putincame into power, he hailed him as
the greatest thing since slice bread.Putin is a true leader, a defender
of Christianity, He's anti gay,he represents everything that we Republicans should stand
(20:03):
for. So this tradition, Iwish it had not triumphed with Donald trum
But right now they have a strangleholdon the Republican Party. It's an amazing
reversal of fortune. These guys wereon the margins for decades. They were
(20:29):
dismissed as the fringe, as koops, and now they dominate. They seized
control of the Republican Party. Andyou know, my life in the Republican
Party is all in the state ofNew Hampshire, a moderate state, a
very purple state. You know,the Republicans tend to hold at this point
at least they hold the state officesand the Democrats are holding the federal offices.
(20:52):
But the party itself was more moderatebefore I got involved, before I
joined, and during my time asyou know, as a can as a
chairman, all the different things,trying to hold trying to hold fast to
the idea that the party could bemoderate, it could could be conservative without
being crazy, was where my headwas in it at that time. Like
(21:15):
that, I was convinced that thesegment of the party, the people,
the principles that you're talking about rightnow, represented the fast minority. And
I could say to the left,there was this minority way off to the
left that was destructive in other ways, either I completely miscalculated it or it
has just dramatically grown and changed inthe last you know, since my you
(21:37):
know, my days eight or tenyears now, you know, since I
was in that role. And that'swhy I want to ask you, what
is your perception of it or youridea of it. It has Donald Trump,
because I have a pretty strong opinionabout this the answer to this question.
Has Donald Trump taken over the partyand you know kind of you know,
laid out this position, this messageand somehow vincent all to join in.
(22:02):
Or was the party just waiting forDonald Trump? You know where they're
the people in the party just waitingfor Trump to come along and give them
that voice. I think ultimately youhave to blame the party. It's receptive
to someone like Trump. Trump hasbeen very consistent in his views. He
gave an interview and Playboy in nineteenninety in which he said that we're being
(22:26):
laughed at around the world, thatJapan and Germany are taking us to the
cleaners. It's all this same andyou know, h Ross Perrout, wasn't
that different from Trump? Patrick Buchanan. Trump's gift has been that he has
finally found the one product that hecan sell, authoritarianism. All of his
(22:48):
other businesses have actually gone bankrupt.But data to State of New York now
too. Yes, imagine what thatmust do to his brain that he has
been picked out of doing business inthe State of New York. That must
be making his brain wild right now. Not that we want to get into
these mental illness issues, but that'sa whole different story. Yeah, and
(23:11):
we'll see what the extent of hisof his financial resources are parental right now.
Yep. Absolutely. Actually, youknow, I don't mean to sound
pessimistic because I continue to believe thatwhat Trump is selling in this election is
not a winning message. I donot believe. I'm not convinced that the
majority of Americans want an authoritarian asa leader. Yeah, I agree with
(23:37):
that completely. Trump is really pushingit both in his in his statements.
He seems to becoming increasingly strident,and I would suggest, you know,
more and more obviously unbalanced, whichseems like such a such a mild term
for what I think he really is. But his strident stridency is strident nature.
(24:03):
The stridentness of what is of howpower he's expressing himself lately, I
think is a reflection of that too. And I think that he has personal
fear about where he's going. Ithink a lot of what Donald Trump is
is both his base in both hisown fear and his knowledge that he can
ignite fear in others. That's howhe you know, creates this influence and
this you know, is able toadvance his message, I think to some
(24:26):
degree that to the degree that hedoes so we use mentioned early on alexiing
Evoli and the tragedy of his death, which I think was just three or
four days ago now from when we'respeaking, and in approximately the same timeframe,
maybe just before that, I can'tremember, before or after Linda Graham
it made it clear that he wasgoing to be opposing future you know,
(24:48):
any Eddie for any further aid toUkraine, which is of course for him
a complete turnaround from you know,his position throughout his entire life is you
know, the the partnership that hehad with John McCain that you know,
he's always positioned himself as a voicefor democracy and supporting the importance of supporting
our friends around the world. Andto see that happen at the same time
(25:10):
that Navale died, there's I don'tknow if I can even exactly express what's
in my head, but there's aconnection there to me there, you know,
it's it's like Lindsay is Lindsay Grahamis turning on democracy at this moment
when there are people in Russia willingto give their lives for it. And
what does it mean when we withdrawour support from you know, freedom seekers
(25:32):
like the Ukrainians, like you know, a country, you know, a
country that wants very much to embracethe West, to you know, to
to embrace modern democracy, to looksto the United States for that leadership and
that support and that uplift. Andit seems to me that what we just
saw happen with Graham and Navalney andthe way that I'm sorry, I know,
(25:55):
I'm sound like I'm rambling, probably, and the way that the right
is trying so hard to withdraw supportfor an emerging democracy like that is just
to me, like laying it outas obviously as we can. What the
danger is here? I mean,the right is giving putin permission to do
and be anything he wants, whereverhe wants. How do we fight that?
(26:18):
If this book is a warning andI agree with you, I think
the majority of Americans want to wouldreject the idea of authoritarianism. But Trump
is going to be on the ballotfor president this year. He's going to
be one of or two primary choices. How do we fight that? How
do we defeat it, Well,we need to just to talk openly about
his authoritarian ambitions, and I thinkthat discussion has begun that it's it's not
(26:47):
as though he would enter office withouta blueprint. If you look at the
Heritage Foundation twenty twenty five project,Yeah five twenty twenty five, they have
so explained that for folks. Idon't know if we've discussed that on this
podcast yet, So if you wouldn'tmind just laying it out and brief for
them what heard what twenty twenty fiveis about. Well, it's essentially a
(27:11):
document that explains how Trump can putin loyalists, how he can fire immediately
forty to fifty thousand civil servants andreplace them with his own people, and
how to gut what they call thedeep state, which really means an independent
(27:32):
Justice Department, the FBI, andthe CIA. Trump's ambition will be to
make all of these agencies loyal tohim personally rather than the constitution. Now
why is that? It's because Trump. We talk about democracy a lot,
(27:52):
but what he's really opposed to isthe rule of law. He does not
want to be constricted either in hisfinancial dealings. As we've seen he says
when he gets when he gets convictedin court, he says, or found.
You know, he's penalized. Hesays, it's a rigged system.
No, it's not. It's therule of law. And the same thing
(28:17):
applies to him as president. Hewants to be able to extort foreign governments
on behalf of himself, as hetried with Volodimir Zelensky in Ukraine. He
wants to cut deals with the Saudis, as Jared Kushner has done. He
has already done dollars. So essentiallyyou would have an unleashed president. He's
(28:37):
already said that under his conception ofimmunity, the president could assassinate his political
opponents. Well, who just didthat, Vladimir Putin. So we have
been warned. Anyone who goes intothis election thinking that there's no real difference
between these candidates might want to takea closer look. And it's frightening.
(29:00):
And you're not saying anything that Idon't already know that I'm sure everybody in
our audience audience already knows. Butit's really frightening to hear you lay it
out in exactly the way that youjust did. These what Donald Trump has
said, what Putin has done,what Donald Trump said, what Putin did,
back and forth like that. Andone of the things that I have
expressed concern about on the air andin writing and all, you know,
(29:22):
various platforms, is that my concernis that Americans. I have great faith
in the American people and in theAmerican promise. And I'm not naive.
I understand you know, what theyou know, what the weaknesses of America
has been, what our mistakes havebeen, you know, the damage and
the you know things that you knowthat has occurred in our in our growth
(29:48):
as a democracy. But I worrythat we have lived in a time maybe
it's a relative piece, a timeof relative comfort or while people feel you
know, freak always sort of feellike they're struggling financially, we are living
in a time of relative wealth whenyou look at the numbers, and that
as a result, we have becomelazy defenders of democracy and that you know,
(30:11):
people often talk about how Hitler slowlyjust you know, step by step,
year by year, and then suddenlywe were at this point where we
were in a world war with aguy who was trying to commit genocide against
an entire people. That it wasyou know, a gradual taking over,
gradually bringing people to his side,to his way. I'd worry that sometimes
(30:33):
that we might be on a similarpath that the far right Trump, and
frankly not just the far right dR and C. I listened to Ron,
I listened to you know, allthese other elected party leaders, that
we are just gradually being desensitized tojust how problematic the entire Republican Party approach
(30:53):
to American democracy has become, andthat instead of having a huge uprising of
people, you know, I'd loveto see ninety percent of the vote go
to Biden this ball, but insteadof that that it seems like maybe it's
a trickle, trickle trickle, andin another four years or another eight years,
if we're going to be so muchfarther down, that's gonna be so
(31:15):
much worse that all of a sudden, we're living in a world that's very
different and everyone's gonna be surprised byit. Am I overly concerned? No,
there's good reason to be concerned.I would also say that there is,
there is, there has been,and is a backlash to Trump and
(31:37):
his authoritarian ambitions. You see itin the in the elections that have been
taking place where Democrats have been winningby much wider margins than anyone anticipated.
Yes, Wisconsin, the governor hasnow put out a fair map for the
state legislature. These things can becombated. They require organ tozation. W
(32:00):
Wisconsin obviously has done a phenomenal job. If you just capitulate like Lindsey Graham
and accommodate yourself to what you perceiveto be the new realities, then you
and Bolden Trump he would like toemploy Salami tactics as president, constantly whittling
(32:22):
away at American rights and expanding hisown power. And if people are unwilling
to confront it or to openly saywhat is transpiring, then we're in what
George H. W. Bush oncecalled deep doo doo. George H.
(32:43):
W. Bush the most poetic ofour of our presidents. And it wasn't
an hw who at the convention essentiallyused a phrase like like showed them the
door, Like there's the door ifyou don't like it, you know,
addressing kind of this farther right attemptat influencing the party at that time,
essentially showed them the door at atthe convention, I'm almost certain it was
(33:07):
him. And again that was myadult that was in my adulthood. Like
it is striking to me how faraway that feels now for the way that
the party has changed, the partyhas been changing actually since since nineteen sixty
four. Nixon sort of was ahiatus, I think, and then with
(33:31):
Reagan it starts, it starts totake on a sharper edge. George H.
W. Bush was pilloried by theright wing of the Roblic Party,
all right because for breaking is nonew taxes pledge. But they just didn't
like him anyway. They saw mysoft and cultural issues. His son,
George W. Bush did not makethe same mistake. So what you've basically
(33:53):
seen in the GOP is a constantshift towards the right and an unwillingness.
We haven't talked about New Kingdridge too. He's the bomb throat where in nineteen
ninety four who essentially sets the basisfor blowing up Congress so you no longer
(34:14):
govern. Instead, you go onFox News, you get media hits,
but you're not actually interested in publicpassing legislation, let alone cooperating with your
opposition, who he defined is theenemy. Now that's where we get when
we start talking, which is languagethat was not always traditionally used in politics.
(34:37):
When you start talking about your youradversaries, is enemies, unpatriotic.
You know, we're getting into WeimarRepublic language, where then you talk get
taught. You get Trump talking aboutretribution, about exterminating the vermin who were
first. You know, he's callingpeople, he's talking about humans. He
(35:00):
uses the he uses language to dehumanizehis opponents or the people that he sees
as you know, polluting the blood, the American blood or But and that's
one of the things that I respondto very very strongly in a negative way.
But I also think it's something thatwe see people responding to in the
far right in a very positive manner. They love that language. Now there's
(35:22):
a reason which gets your opening questionabout why people are gravitating towards this.
You think about life in East Germanyor in the East Block for which some
people felt nostalgia. It takes theguess work out of your life. You
know how you're supposed to behave,you know what will what will be rewarded,
(35:45):
what isn't Things are regimented, youdon't have There's there's not too much
need for independent thinking. It's allset out for you. If that's how
you want to live, then Trumpis your man, which is which is
just mind boggling to think about,because when you think about the roots of
(36:06):
America, regardless of what was goodor you know, bad and weak about
it, And you know, wetalk a lot now, you know lately,
I shouldn't even say lately, weshould talk a lot more than we
do about the weaknesses of some ofour founding founding fathers or about the you
know, the impact that slavery continuesto have in our world today. But
what you just said that if youdon't want to have to think for yourself,
(36:27):
if you want it, if youwant life to be intellectually easy,
then you gravitate toward Trump. Butwe were founded on the idea that we
wanted life to be intellectually complicated,that we wanted independent thinking, independent development.
That you know, that was youknow, the basis of liberty and
freedom. And that's a complete rejectthere's a complete rejection of that amongst the
(36:52):
Mega mentality, the Mega movement.I know that I'm getting over my time
with you, so I don't wantto keep you too long. So I'm
going to just ask you a verygeneral question. I think that you have
made some of the most powerful points, or you have expressed these points is
some of the most direct and powerfulways that I've heard in a very long
time. And so I just wantto sort of give you an open floor
(37:14):
and remind people. The book iscalled America Last, the right century long
romance with foreign dictators. We're talkingto the author, talk to me just
kind of give you, like,what is your closing thought? Then I
guess or what do you think isthe most important message that we need people
to get from this conversation? Ithink, other than go buy the book.
(37:39):
One of the reasons I wrote AmericaLast, which I talk about in
the acknowledgments, is because I havea personal familiarity with Germany, and my
mother and father were both born inNazi Germany, and my father emigrated in
nineteen forty to the US. SoI would urge people not to take democracy
(38:06):
for granted. If there's one thingthat Germany shows, this was a highly
advanced industrialized society at the intellectual apexof Europe at the turn of the century,
and the Weimar Republic that emerged afterWorld War One was it was not
(38:30):
doomed. It was a republic withoutenough Republicans in the classical sense, if
you just stand by, as Burkesaid, you know, if good men
do nothing, then evil will prevail. I'm not trying to say that everyone
who supports Trump is evil. I'mjust saying that I would think long and
(38:52):
hard about what I could do totry not only to preserve but also to
protect American democracy at a very dangerousmoment in American history. And that's what
it's all about. That's the coreof it right there. And from my
perspective, you know, I thinkwe have to find a way to make
what you just said preserving, youknow, a democracy at this critical moment
(39:16):
in the life of our nation.We have to find a way to make
it very personal and very clear toall Americans, to people as individuals,
so that they look at that andsay, oh, yeah, that's why
I have to speak up. Ihave to be part of it. I
have to have to make sure thatthis does not that this does not succeed,
that neither Trump nor the MAGA movementsucceeds going forward. Fantastic conversation.
(39:42):
I'm really grateful, Jacob that youjoined us. It's Jacob Halbroun and the
book is America Last, the RightCentury Law, Romance with foreign Dictators.
I hope that you will join usagain. We're going to have a lot
of these conversations going forward between nowon election day and I hope we get
the opportunity to speak to you again. Thank you so much for being here.
Thank you, it was wonderful.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Cardiac Cowboys
The heart was always off-limits to surgeons. Cutting into it spelled instant death for the patient. That is, until a ragtag group of doctors scattered across the Midwest and Texas decided to throw out the rule book. Working in makeshift laboratories and home garages, using medical devices made from scavenged machine parts and beer tubes, these men and women invented the field of open heart surgery. Odds are, someone you know is alive because of them. So why has history left them behind? Presented by Chris Pine, CARDIAC COWBOYS tells the gripping true story behind the birth of heart surgery, and the young, Greatest Generation doctors who made it happen. For years, they competed and feuded, racing to be the first, the best, and the most prolific. Some appeared on the cover of Time Magazine, operated on kings and advised presidents. Others ended up disgraced, penniless, and convicted of felonies. Together, they ignited a revolution in medicine, and changed the world.