>> WITH EVIDENCE OF PAILURES IN THE UNITED STATES AND
ILL-CONCEIVED WARS AND INTERVENTIONS ABROAD, AUTHOR
ALASTAIR ROBERTS BELIEVERS IT'S NOT SURPRISING THAT GOVERNMENT
IS REGARDED BY SOME AS A MESS.
BUT WHAT EXACTLY IS GOVERNMENT SUPPOSED TO DO?
AND IS THE TRACK RECORD OF WESTERN GOVERNMENT SO AWFUL?
ROBERT'S LATEST BOOK "CAN GOVERNMENT DO ANYTHING RIGHT"
EXPLORES JUST THAT.
>> SO I NOTICED ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO PEOPLE WERE TALKING A LOT
ABOUT THE COLLAPSE OF DEMOCRACY, AND --
>> THE WORLD IS GOING TO END.
>> EVERYTHING WAS GOING TO PIECE, AND I THOUGHT THAT THAT'S
OVERWROUGHT, SO WHAT I WANTED TO DO IS EXPLORE WHAT IS GOING ON,
AND I DID THIS BOOK THIS YEAR, AND I DID ANOTHER BOOK CALLED
FOUR CRISIS OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY WHICH CAME OUT LAST
YEAR, IT'S TRYING TO PUT OUR CURRENT PREDICAMENT IN
PERSPECTIVE.
>> I ALSO APPRECIATED ABOUT THE BOOK HOW NOT ONLY THE U.S.
PERSPECTIVE, BUT YOU BROADEN IT QUITE A BIT.
SO IT GIVES US A SENSE OF MORE OF A GLOBAL COMMUNITY.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT OCCURRED IN THE BOOK, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE
PROCESS OF GOVERNMENT AND LAW-MAKING, IT CAN SEEM TO ME SO
REACTIONARY, RIGHT, WE HAVE A PROBLEM, WHETHER IT'S A PROBLEM
WITH GUNS OR A PROBLEM WITH FACEBOOK, AND WE REBECCA TO TRY
AND MAKE LAWS THAT CAN HELP US TO SOLVE THESE PROBLEMS.
I WAS WONDERING, I WANT TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS ON IT, WHAT IF WE
PUT TERM LIMITS ON PEOPLE WHO ARE HOLDING ELECTED OFFICE?
THEY WOULD COME OUT OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR OR THEIR, WITH
THEIR JOB, SERVE AND THEN GO BACK IN THE INDUSTRY.
DO YOU THINK THAT THAT WOULD HELP FOR PEOPLE TO BE LESS
REACTIONARY AND MORE PROACTIVE?
>> I AM NOT SURE THAT WOULD DO PUSH TO MAKE THE PROCESS BETTER.
THEY HAVE TRIED TERM LIMITS AND THEY TURN OUT TO HAVE THEIR OWN
PROBLEMS, THE BIG PROBLEM IN AMERICAN POLITICS TODAY IS NOT
ABOUT THINGS LIKE TERM LIMITS BUT ABOUT BIG IDEAS ABOUT WHAT
DO YOU THINK THE GOVERNMENT IS SUPPOSED TO BE DOING.
WHAT SHOULD GOVERNMENT BE DOING WITH REGARD TO THE ECONOMY.
WHAT ARE THE GOVERNMENT'S OBLIGATIONS AND HOW DO THEY
EXECUTE THEM?
IT'S MORE OF A CRISIS OF BIG IDEAS THAN THESE KIND OF SMALL
TECHNICAL FIXES.
>> SO YOU POINT OUT IN THE BOOK THIS CONCEPT OF FOUR GOALS FOR
GOVERNMENT.
MASTERY OVER CIRCUMSTANCES, RECOGNITION OF THE STATE'S RIGHT
TO GOVERN TERRITORY, AND ADVANCEMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, AND
PROMOTION OF ECONOMIC GROWTH.
DO YOU THINK THAT ONE OF THOSE AREAS IN PARTICULAR IS MORE
IMPORTANT OR SHOULD LEADERS WORK TO BALANCE ALL FOUR OF THOSE
GOALS?
>> WELL, SO THE BASIC IDEA IS THAT THERE ARE THE GOALS THAT
ARE ALWAYS OPERATING.
LEADERS ARE ALWAYS WORRIED ABOUT THEM, BUT THE PRIORITY CHANGES.
IT DEPENDS ON THE MOMENT.
IT DEPENDS ON CIRCUMSTANCES.
SO IN THE 1990s AFTER THE COLLAPSE OF THE SOVIET UNION AND
BEFORE CONCERNS ABOUT THE DOMESTIC TERRORISM PEOPLE COULD
PUT SECURITY TO THE SIDE AND FOCUS ON GLOBALIZATION, ECONOMIC
GROWTH THROUGH THE GROWTH OF GLOBAL MARKETS AND MORE RECENTLY
WE HAVE BEGUN TO SEE THE LIMITS, SO PEOPLE ARE REBALANCING,
RIGHT.
ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE THINKING ABOUT IS THAT THE RIGHT WAY OF
PROMOTING PROSPERITY, SHOULD WE WORRY MORE ABOUT SECURITY?
>> IN TERMS OF HOW YOU SEGMENTED THE WORLD, YOU WERE BOUND BY
STATES.
AND I WAS STRUCK BY THE NUMBER, 195 STATES, MAKES THE WORLD SEEM
SMALLER WHEN YOU BREAK IT DOWN.
WHY DID YOU APPROACH IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE.
>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS GOING ON IS IN THE 1990s WE
THOUGHT THAT WE WERE ENTERING WHAT IS CALLED A BORDERLESS
WORLD.
PEOPLE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE END OF THE NATION STATE, THE
WORLD IS FLAT AND ALL OF THAT, AND THE STATE, THIS KIND OF
BASIC BUILDING BLOCK OF POLITICAL ORDER, COUNTRIES, HAVE
COME ROARING BACK.
YOU CAN SEE THAT FOR EXAMPLE IN PRESIDENT TRUMP'S RHETORIC AND
IN THE POLITICS IN EUROPE AND SO ON.
SO ONE OF POINTS HERE IS THAT THE STATE IS BACK, THE KIND OF
FUNDAMENTAL UNIT OF POLITICAL LIFE AND WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE
UT, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH DO BORDERS MATTER AND SO ON.
>> AND CERTAIN CIRCLES VERY MUCH.
>> RIGHT.
>> AND I MENTIONED BEFORE THE BOOK LOOKS AT NOT ONLY THE STATE
BUT A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE AND TWO STATS THAT I THOUGHT WERE
INTERESTING, SO YOU POINTED OUT A 2016 GAP YOU HOPE POLL THAT
THIS 10% OF PEOPLE HAD A LOT OF CONFIDENCE IN CONGRESS HERE IN
THE UNITED STATES.
WE GO ACROSS THE POND TO THE U.K.
AND FOUR AND FIVE BEFORE HIMS DON'T TRUST THEIR
POLITICIANS TO TELL THE TRUTH.
SO INTERESTING TO SEE THAT THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM UNIQUE TO THE
UNITED STATES, RIGHT.
>> NO.
THERE ARE A LOT OF WESTERN DEMOCRACIES THAT ARE GOING
THROUGH THIS APPARENT CRISIS OF LEGITIMACY, AND THEY WENT
THROUGH A SIMILAR ONE IN THE 1970s, AND THE 1930s, AS
WELL, THIS FEELING THAT EVERYTHING WAS FALLING APART.
ONE OF THE OTHER INTERESTING ELEMENTS IN ALL THESE CRISIS
PEOPLE WERE LOOKING AT NON-DEMOCRATIC REGIMES AND
SAYING THESE GUYS ARE DOING BETTER.
SO FOR EXAMPLE A LOT OF FOLKS LOOK AT CHINA AND SAY CHINA
SEEMS TO HAVE ITS ACT TOGETHER.
IT'S NOT A DEMOCRACY BUT HAS ITS ACT TOGETHER.
SO ONE OF THE REASONS I AM WRITE THINKING BOOK IS TO SAY LOOK
LET'S TAKE A LONG VIEW.
LET'S NOT JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS ABOUT WHETHER DEMOCRACY WORKS OR
DOESN'T WORK BASED ON THE SHORT-TERM CRISES.
>> I LIKE THE PHRASE YOU USED IN THE BOOK, YOU SAID THAT THE
BOOK, WHILE YOU ARE LOOKING AT A THESE PROBLEMS, THEY ARE NOT IN
A THREAT FOR IMMEDIATE COLLAPSE.
>> THE BASIC IDEA IS THAT GOVERNING IS HARD, WE TALKED
ABOUT THE FOUR BASIC GOALS, THE LEADERS ARE TRYING TO FOLLOW.
BUT THE STRATEGIES THAT THEY USED TO PURSUE THOSE ARE REALLY
COMPLICATED AND CONTINGENT ON CIRCUMSTANCES.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE SO YOU ARE CONSTANTLY -- LEADERS ARE
TRYING TO REINVENTED THEIR APPROACH TO SECURITY TOWARDS
HUMAN RIGHTS, TOWARDS PROSPERITY AND CONSTANTLY HAVE TO REINVENT
THE STRATEGY.
THAT MEANS TAKING PARTICIPANT OLD IDEAS AND PUTTING TOGETHER
NEW ONES.
AND WHAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH RIGHT NOW IS ONE OF THOSE PHASES
WHERE WE'RE KIND OF ABANDONING OLD IDEAS AND FIGURE OUT WHAT'S
THE PATH FORWARD.
THE CRITICAL POINT IS THAT EVERY STATE HAS TO DO THIS.
DEMOCRATIC OR NOT.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT DEMOCRACIES ARE GOOD AT DOING IS
REINVENTING THEMSELVES.
IT'S PAINFUL, BUT THEY CAN DO IT.
A CONTRAST WOULD BE A STATE LIKE THE SOVIET UNION WHICH TRIED IN
THE 1980s TO DO IT.
THEY COULDN'T.
IT WAS TOO BRITTLE, AND IT JUST BASICALLY COLLAPSED.
SO WE GO THROUGH THESE PAINFUL ADJUSTMENTS, BUT AT LEAST WE
SURVIVE.
WE ARE RESILIENT.
>> YOU LOOK AHEAD SORT OF TO THE NEXT 30 YEARS IN THE BOOK.
YOU POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE FOUR PROBLEMS TO LIKELY
PERSISTER HERE, RIGHT.
YOU HAVE SEEN THEM INTENSIFYING.
TERRORISM, CLIMATE CHANGE, RIVALRIES AND ECONOMIC
INEQUALITY.
AND YOU POINT OUT THAT YOU CAN APPROACH US FROM TWO WAYS,
RIGHT.
YOU CAN BE MORE OPEN AND FORWARD LOOKING OR MAYBE MORE DEFENSIVE.
BUT IS THERE NOT SOME GRAY AREA THERE AS WELL?
>> THAT'S RIGHT, AND A LOT OF THESE CHALLENGES ARE MAKING US
THINK MORE ABOUT BORDERS, RIGHT, AND THE -- WHAT IT MEANS TO BE A
NATION.
AND MAKE US THINK MORE ABOUT THE SECURITY.
THAT'S PROBABLY, THAT PROBABLY MEANS THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE
LESS OPEN THAN WE WERE IN THE 1990s.
BUT WE WANT TO BE CAREFUL NOT TO OVERREACT BECAUSE A LOT OF THESE
TRENDS KIND OF INDUCE ANXIETY.
THEY INDUCE A SENSE OF UNCERTAINTY AND FEAR.
AND THE TENDENCY IS TO KIND OF HUNKER DOWN.
WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS RESIST GOING TOO FAR IN THAT DIRECTION
BECAUSE WHEN YOU ARE FACING ALL THESE NEW CHALLENGES, YOU HAVE
TO BE OPEN TO NEW IDEAS.
YOU HAVE TO BE THINKING CREATIVELY ABOUT HOW YOU ADAPT
AND GO WITH THE FLOW.
HOW YOU ACCOMMODATE THE TURBULENCE, SO YOU WANT TO
PRESERVE A CERTAIN DEGREE OF OPENNESS AND PRESERVE A SOCIETY
THAT IS OPEN TO LEARNING AND ADAPTATION BECAUSE THAT, IN THE
LONG RUN IS, HOW DEMOCRACY IN ALL STATES REALLY SURVIVE.