You obviously either didn’t listen to the interview or, if you did, didn’t understand a word of it. The whole point is that Donald Trump is the antithesis of what a conservative is or a conservative believes
George is truly a pleasure to listen to. His use of vocabulary is mesmerizing. Although I understand the words, I could never be able use them in a cohesive manner to express my own thought processes as effortlessly as George does. Let’s face it he is one of the true upper top of the 1% of the intelligences in this nation. Yet , herein lies the problem. Although he understands and mentions the populism of our current President , he cannot fathom the thought that Trump is the antithesis of his perception of how a President behaves in our separation of powers democracy. It is precisely why he occupies the White House today.The American people put him there to effect a change from the ensconced Washington elite of business as usual mentality putting the Citizens aside for there own personal gain. How long can this go on? The old saying goes “ it’s hard to see the forest from the trees” I think applies to George as he has been a Washington insider for over 50 years. Will he really go with Pinocchio 🤥 Joe ? What a shame.If he does, I guess he really should stay in his Ivy Tower and give soliloquy’s from the balcony ,they do sound pretty .
Tm Kapp If you use teens like “lefties”, then you are not even capable of rational informed discussion. Such pejorative reveal more about you than about them.
It is so refreshing to see a man I have always respected, even when we didn’t agree, who had the chutzpah to say what he felt even when the prevailing winds were blowing the other way.
His age is starting to show. But he is still very interesting to listen to and much more right than wrong. Too bad most Americans will never be able to follow his thinking when it comes to the origins on the proper role of gov't.
WTF? You cannot be serious? Will's brand of "Conservatism" is bending over and taking it up the rear, then asking for more, then paying the guy's cab fare back home. Will's brand of neoconservatism brought us two endless wars, offshoring of millions of jobs, a decimated manufacturing segment, and it allowed us to cede all popular culture to the left. In other words THEY CONSERVED NOTHING. This effing fraudulent asshole. I don't care if you don't like Donald Trump, as long as you lay out specifc grievances with policy decisions and offer realistic alternatives. He doesn't. If your critique is that Trump is a dirty dick, or a mean mean meanie, then your critique is worthless. We all know that. But I'm 100% done with neoconservative globalist bullshit. George Will is a reflexive Never-Trumper. ALL reflexive Never-Trumpers are, by nature, intellectually dishonest feeble-minded douches. He's no different than Bill Kristol: worthless. You cannot wait until the POTUS says something, then take the opposite view, and proceed to hold yourself up as some sort of public intellectual. He is just a pure hack.
@@rickrudd When Trump closes the border, I’ll give him credit. Same goes for: 1. Defunding Planned Parenthood 2. Repealing Obamacare 3. Ending Common Core 4. Draining the Swamp 5. Shrinking government 6. Reining in spending In the meantime, I'm not going to waste my time arguing with a Trumphumper. If you can't see that he is a New York liberal, I can't help you.
@@markfinley8921That is unfair on many levels, but typical of internet interactions. A) I am anything but I Trump Humper. I went around calling everyone an idiot who supported him during the primary. I was convinced we were doomed. But I did vote for him. Why? Because look at what the left in this nation represents. It's vile. B) Mark, I voted for W twice, for John McCain, and for Mitt Romney. I have voted for Jim Gilmore, George Allen, Ken Cuccinelli, Ed Gillespie, Bob McDonnell, and a million other Republicans. I have never voted for a Democrat one time in my life, and given what that represents today, I never will unless they suddenly took LSD and forgot what they actually are all about. I like to call balls and strikes. But, out of your list, the things with which I'm concerned are Immigration...immigration. Small govt and the other things can come after immigration. Unless and until we protect our borders and prevent Dems from destroying the demography of the US, importing a whole new voting base, and permanently altering the landscape of the US electorate, it is all a moot point. We're done if they take over. I really don't care about the wall at all, but that would be nice. I care about policy and stopping the flow of illegals. No amnesty. Deport those who flagrantly show disregard for our laws and sovereign border. Back to George Will. He's a spineless milquetoast and truly worthless to the fight we Red Blooded Americans are fighting. Trump may not be who we wanted, but he's who we have, and there is no fight if we lose this one. President Kamala effing Harris equals Commie USA, comrade.
Yes! Margaret Thatcher slams Hayek's Constitution of Liberty on the table and exclaims, "This is what we believe!" Donald Trump slams a copy of the National Enquirer on the table and says, "These are the real Americans". Yeah, conservatism is under threat alright.
"Sad and embarrassed and exhausted". I certainly hope that is true. If not, I suspect your experiment is heading into very dark waters. Good luck from Australia.
I used to read him, impressed by his composition, vocabulary, attitude. Felt I was in the company of New England elite academia. But recently I listen, understand, but have no sense that what he says is original or true or applicable, as though he creates a verbal gas that alters the mind to believe something significant has been said until the spell wears off and nothing remains.
Wow! For many years I never missed his Newsweek column or Sunday morning with David Brinkley, where I thought they should all bow and let him say a lot more. His books back in those days were mostly collections of his columns. I gradually drifted away from his writing and I didn’t really know why. To me his wit is still unrivaled (except by Christopher Hitchens before he died), and his knowledge is breathtaking, but do you really think “what he says is not original or true or applicable”? What a damning thing to say.
According to Deidre McCloskey, it was a shift in public rhetoric that ultimately unleashed the rise of capitalism. I've lived in Latin America for 20 years and followed it closely for 30. I see almost zero difference between Donald Trump and Hugo Chavez, in style or in substance. You think they are different because as Adam Smith said, "there is a lot of ruin in a nation" and there is much more to ruin in the U.S. It took Chavez 20 years to destroy Venezuela. It didn't happen over night. Maybe it will take a combo of MAGAs and Sanders-style socialists 50 years to destroy the U.S., but both brands of populism are a sickness that will eventually kill us. Preferring populist knuckleheads to the great ideas of our tradition is not for free, even if you don't see the cost immediately.
It's helpful for people to understand the concept of conservatism as articulated by George Will. But he still has problems, such as when claiming conservatives aren't opposed to social security. Look at the old debates, George. It was conservative Republicans opposed to this new "communist" program. Sadly, too many conservatives still react from knee-jerk, ideological positions. Yes, the GOP hijacked and abandoned the conservative principles you espouse. But you largely rooted the process on until it got away from you.
At 10:45 he cites the statistic of 77% of Americans in 1964 had faith in the government all the time or almost all the time. Only 17% now, he says. Well it seems he completely ignores, at least on this specific point, that faith in the government was soon shattered in the few short years following 1964 by the Vietnam War and even more so ten years later in the aftermath of Watergate. That's not to say there hasn't been a continuous downward trend in "trusting the guvment" since then but I genuinely believe any reasonable scholar addressing this point of the people's trust in the government would likely conclude, quite quickly, that the decade between 1964 and 1974 is the historical catalyst which provoked a general mistrust of government that carries forward to this very day. And perhaps, though folks didn't realize it at the time, the actual flash point of this mistrust were those three shots fired in Dealey Plaza on a sunny afternoon in Dallas. As a practical matter, I would suggest that mistrust of government is actually a good thing. A little cynicism in this area of general thought process is a healthy remedy to the stagnate and oftentimes hypnotic betrayal of one's individual liberties and pursuit of happiness in such a way that to not question government authority is to yield to the whimsical directives of government employees who too often forget that it is actually We The People who tell the government what to do. Not the other way around.
Regarding his comment on nation building: he was for it before he was against it. He's good at being a historical naysayer; pointing out what may not have worked in the past. He is less able to see how the future could be, since despite what he says, his brand of conservatism wants to keep the status quo at a minimum, or even roll back to that mythical time when everyone was a Jeffersonian farmer.
vkorchnoifan An economic system doesn’t make a country good or bad. It makes it successful. What does it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world but lose his soul (Mark 8:36) Fighting for this country or any country for that matter is a lost cause seeing that the soul of every country is rotten. Save your own soul and help others to do the same.
Public intellectual?! He’s not an intellectual. He’s just a right wing corporate shill who uses big words and has a fetish about grammar. Conservatism doesn’t have an intellectual pedigree. It’s got snob appeal. The Founders were classic 18th century liberals. They were not “conservatives” at all. Liberalism really was a political philosophy once upon a time - based on notions like natural rights and limited government. Conservatism, on the hand, has never been a genuine political philosophy. It’s merely an attitude of opposition to any radical reforms that threaten the welfare of the social elite.
A true intellectual and American gem. Generations will read and be influenced by his words, and be better off for it. "No one has gotten rich betting against the United States and the American people". Amen, George
@Eat Shnitzel Already making the mistake of judging US as an empire. As Afghanistan showed, US usually does not have the philosophy or appetite to expand territory and colonies. Influence, yes. But not lands, relative to historical references (e.g., Greece, Roman, Portugal, Spain, France, England, Austria, Germany, Japan, Russia, etc)
If you're using the term "empire" colloquially, and not academically, then I don't see any nation that will usurp America's #1 position in economy, GDP, per Capita wealth, military size/capability in my lifetime
@Eat Shnitzel You are incorrect. US has historically has not been an empire, which by academic definitions requires a single centralized authority. Your examples of military bases are actually an example of influence but not subjugated territories. US, like every country, have consistent examples of it's less fortunate. It is irrelevant to it's #1 leadership ranking in per Capita wealth, GDP economy, military capability. China?? There's a reason why that country still pegs their currency (yuan) to the US dollar, lol
Leacroft Mattadeen Because he’s the “safest bet” for saying things which are soothing & comforting, yet have some historical frame of reference. Everyone else with jobs in media is either too young or too illiterate of history to be able to discuss politics without personal, emotional response.
Will's accounting of national borrowing to pay for services, around 15:45, is counterfactual. Our grandchildren cannot send goods and services back through time from the future to us now. Generations unborn will inherit debt, it's true. They will also inherit an asset of exactly the same size: the matching credits. Will's accounting forgets the credits, imagines time travel, ignores the actual *current* transactions which pay for present goods and service, and is thus entirely fanciful and false.
David Lloyd-Jones this is the type Will criticism that makes me giggle. The critic that criticizes Will in such a manner that exposes the critic for TOTALLY missing the point. What he’s saying (using your vernacular): IF the debt the future generation inherits has a corresponding credit that future generation will benefit from it is moral to have that future generation share in its cost. HOWEVER if we are borrowing from future generations to pay for decadent govt overreach of which the future will not see a corresponding credit, it is robbing an unborn child’s security.
@@dcj-bz4on You are quite right that he is saying we are consuming things that haven't been made yet, enjoying services performed by people not yet born. Like you, he believes in time travel by which our descendants send these good things back to us. I'm simply pointing out that this is not true. We can consume stuff made by our ancestors, and I think it's a damn shame that we do so much of that so carelessly. We can enjoy services performed by people who are alive right now, while they are performing them or while the result of them is still available to us. But from our children or later? Nope. Time travel doesn't work in that direction, backwards. You are not correct to claim that he allows the "owners" of debt, the recipients of interest payments, into his argument. He ignores that side of the ledger altogether. Enjoy your giggles. It's yourself you're laughing at.
David Lloyd-Jones-okay I admit it. You have COMPLETELY lost me on the time travel analogy....when you talk about the corresponding “credit” do you literally mean the accountancy of an account receivable? Interest due? Because yes on a balance sheet for each debt there is a corresponding asset. But if that corresponding asset is 6 million knee replacements that my niece will have to make payments on, while those knees are buried 6 feet deep under a slab of granite? That is quite different than her paying for a bridge built 20 years ago that her 25 year old self drives over every day to get to work.
David Lloyd-Jones-I’m going to try this again....@ 15:40 what Will is saying is that the future generations WILL NOT receive a corresponding credit. THATS the point. We used to spend in a way that a matching asset would apply. We are NOT spending on things the future generations will benefit from. They will get the bill but they will NOT receive the asset (or at the very least) by the time they get it, that asset will be dramatically lower in value than the bill to pay for it. As for the time travel. I can only assume that what you are saying is that future generations cannot spend money on us and “send” us the benefit/asset as we are all pushing up daisies. They don’t need to send us anything!!, We got those goods and services TODAY when we put government goods and services on the federal credit card and let the future generations to pay for it.
While I disagree with him about Trump I love him as a great conservative thinker. His commentary on anything from politics to baseball is always insightful and sharp
All this talk about Trump is a waste of time. Having read George's new book, he offers an imminently better discussion about important matters - and does it without mentioning the current president. Still, Judy wants to drone on about the man. I suspect she - and the other I have seen interviewing George -has not read his book.
There is only one champion of good. He was nailed to a cross 2,000 years ago by people who said, "we are the really good people". He lives on in the hearts of His followers
This is my conservatism! Conservatives are not racist, thanks to liberals, but this is true conservatism. We want to conserve people from radical change with historical context knowledge. As a conservative, this type of conservative, our founding fathers saw this, the US expanded, and therefore, we conservatives need to expand. The president isn’t always the center of all decisions, this was during our founding days. Government is the center. As the US expanded, the role of the presidency grew due to the industrial revolution. Conservatives want to conserve people’s rights, while the US expanded thus the presidency as well. Presidents are just there to approve legislations and make us look cute hahaha Social security is one of the best thing the US made. Yet, conservatives vaulter to fund it, which I always bitch about. The railway system, passed by a GOP president, and also Roe v Wade was passed by a conservative Supreme Court. This is my conservatism, to which I still adhere to.
Will defines his terms to make conservative ideas more palatable. If Will is correct, he is so far from the conservative actions today to be considered an outsider to the very cause he defends.
While Will is clearly very intelligent, articulate and well read, the simple truth is that government and free enterprise are always a balancing act. Deregulation in the financial sector (from the 1980's) led inevitably to a bonus/profit culture that created the 2008 Financial Crisis, while we were being told that such a crisis was no longer possible, because of the spread of risk. Government (i.e. you and me) then had to prop up and bail out the financial sector, which immediately complained that government should then mind its own business so they could go back to generating as much profit as possible. The NRA are lobbying against essential gun control legislation. Pharmaceutical companies exploit patents for maximum profits. Insurance companies are the same. Cartels, monopolies, etc. Humans and their thought systems are fallible, even when they aren't deliberately corrupt. Government has to watch over what happens in the private sector, while not smothering it. It's a complex balance and neither side is 'right', just essential.
You live in a fantasy world of ignorance. The financial crisis was compelled by govenment regulation, the mandating of unsustainable bad debt as a form of reality denying assuaging liberal white guilt that pretened that social utopia could be achieved if everyone were forced to believe the poor were only poor because of discrimination. The massive social experiment, building for three decades, failed, and idiots created the old reliable Marxist fiction of corporate greed. Life doesn't go bad from lack of government. It goes bad from sins of pride.
To have a full meaning of conservatism, Will has to include the nature of money and banking which is currently based on debt when it doesn't have to be. Debt increases through the use of leverage in the creation of new monies for loans at interest. No politicians save Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy have dealt with leverage.
The T-Party would benefit from taking heed of George Will's warnings. Meanwhile democrats gotta do what democrats gotta do. Thoughtful questions, Judy. Almost indecipherable answers. "Correct me if I'm wrong."
I love George, but he misses one thing going on in our society. As people age they are increasingly alone, reliant on the internet for information and entertainment and angry. Its nice to think people are all doing other things besides watching tv cable news - but those "things" are not what they once were...fraternal organizations are in decline. Church engagement is in decline. Sports are teetering. Theres a reason for all of this and he does not really address it.
Ben Sasse has, however; and Will supports his take. Thing is, this country isn't in the exclusive control of the aged; it's a segment of the population, a population of endless overlapping demographics. We do lack fellowship in common interests; but those institutions share a lot of the blame for that. What's more frightening in my view is the people's predilection for seeking validation from the media for their positions -- establishment media and especially social media. No one in the media is telling the truth -- NO ONE. Which makes it the worst place in the world to go to to formulate one's opinions on any subject. The media is supposed to be the sunlight disinfecting our political institutions; it appears to be the other way around now. If consumers of media were as diligent in critiquing the media as they were in critiquing our political leadership, there'd be much more accountability for telling the truth than there is now. But there isn't. Instead we're focusing like a laser on whatever validates our biases. I find that much more deleterious to our future than the difficulty our fraternal organizations are presently having (most of which has been self-inflicted).
I don't like the terms conservatism and capitalism because the use of the suffix implies an ideology. Conservative is epistemological not ideological and there is no ideology to capital at all.
Very insightful as always but the lens that he views the world are from a "normal" elitist perspective. He is of a generation and a very clear example of what having wealth and privilege is thinking.
Something I did not hear addressed by Mr. Will - "You can have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, or you can have democracy; you cannot have both." The late Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis.
Another useless scribbler. Gets invited to all the right dinners, made millions of dollars, but whenever a real conservative, which means a person who has not been miseducated about the centrality of race to the formation and survival of a nation, comes along. . . he attacks. If he had been scribbling in Britain in 1965, he would have attacked Enoch Powell. And there he is with Judy, the Chernenko of PBS.
George Will is oh, so wrong and full of --it. Speaking as a conservative, let me tell you what conservativism is. Conservatism is a belief of preserving traditional norms and ideas and being resistant to change of traditional norms. Period. It is that simple. Why is conservatism under threat? Because of liberalism which is open to fundamental change of traditional norms and values. I could give this discussion better than George Will can.
Unfortunately, they already began a long time ago. It's only since Donald Trump ran for president that the left completely lost its mind and made it obvious.
Even though I deeply appreciate him, Will is proof that, even a highly intelligent man, with a deep philosophical background and no superstitious or religious beliefs, can still have blinders on when it comes to certain things
Jefferson spoke in favour of invading Canada. Not much to admire in that. Madison was in favour as well, except he had to flee out of the White House leaving his dinner on the table, as British forces came in the front door. I do not see high morals and intelligence in the Founding Fathers. They wanted independence to solidify their wealth. They designed a republic to insure their hold on power. Nothing noble here. George speaks of them as saints, and they certainly were not. Whatever Conservatives should be according to George, they are not. They are now self-serving, self-enriching, anti-democratic, bigoted and racist group who insure that those they look down on or outright dislike are kept in poverty and inequality before the law. Conservatives insure that those they deem worthy are kept in control and in wealth. 'Interference' governments seek humanity where there is none, and stable societies insure this. Unstable societies see too much wealth at the top along with too much power while social unrest brews, unrest foments and revolution brews. This isn't rocket science. Conservatives in America have spent the bank while enriching themselves, even from the public purse. There is no real money management done by Conservatives - anywhere. There will never be successful societies as long as Conservatives rule them. There is no charity, or compassion. A certainly no deference to a democratic political system at all.
Keith Carter talk about a jaded view of the founders. I think you may have missed that small point about representation in government. Everyone wants to solidify their wealth. I assume you do too. The point is freedom to keep you hard earned wealth is why the Founding Fathers put it all on the in by pledging their lives their fortunes and their sacred .... well you get the point. I think your comments are not well thought out. No they were not saints but if they were as bad as you say they would not have constructed a government of the people by the people and for the people. Moreover no citizen in America is kept in poverty. Everyone of any race has the ability to make here with a little hard work. There are examples of that everywhere. The only unrest we see is from those unwilling to work hard wanting only something for nothing. Institutional racism no longer exists and where you see the most unrest is in those cities where there are minorities in the Mayor’s office the police chief’s office and the State’s representative. I trust and sincerely hope you understand you are not expressing the problem you are the problem with America. If you even are an American as I am hopeful you are not.
And the take away lessons from Madison & Jefferson: Do..Not..Invade..Canada, nothing good will come of it. Hell iirc General Simcoe burnt the first White House down. 🇨🇦
I used to like George, but he's just another Conservative who allows the left to define the parameters of speech and behavior. Trump is smashing that because he has the backbone to stand against the left in ways guys like Will can't. Conservatism doesn't get anywhere if it is allowed to be criminalized by the left. You might not like Trump, but he's necessary. Check out Victor Davis Hanson and let Will flap his gums on PBS.
Conservatism is doing a fine job criminalising itself, particularly as so many of them end up being indicted, convicted, and sentenced to prison for multiple felonies committed to protect conservative power. Particularly Trump and his criminal gang, several of whom are already in prison.
@@LordZontar that's laughable. The Mueller investigation committed more crimes than the criminals they caught! Meanwhile Clinton ran a pay for play foundation that dried up as soon as her career did. Indicting Russians who will never stand trial was for show. The FISA warrants alone involved more crimes. When Barr and Durham finish their work, people are going down. Trump is going to crush whichever lunatic Democrat they nominate. Buckle up.
@@mattd6086 Matt, we are not discussing things that exist solely in your imagination. Please confine discussion to the real world. You will look less like a fool doing so.
@@LordZontar cute, but idiotic nonetheless. Clinton is hopelessly corrupt. Durham is going to expose the abuses of the Mueller investigation. You can call that imaginary all you like, but it will happen soon. Get a grip.
As a moderate I used to sometimes vote for conservatives. Not anymore. I completely reject Trump and anyone who is in bed with Trumpism.
You obviously either didn’t listen to the interview or, if you did, didn’t understand a word of it. The whole point is that Donald Trump is the antithesis of what a conservative is or a conservative believes
George is truly a pleasure to listen to. His use of vocabulary is mesmerizing. Although I understand the words, I could never be able use them in a cohesive manner to express my own thought processes as effortlessly as George does. Let’s face it he is one of the true upper top of the 1% of the intelligences in this nation. Yet , herein lies the problem. Although he understands and mentions the populism of our current President , he cannot fathom the thought that Trump is the antithesis of his perception of how a President behaves in our separation of powers democracy. It is precisely why he occupies the White House today.The American people put him there to effect a change from the ensconced Washington elite of business as usual mentality putting the Citizens aside for there own personal gain. How long can this go on? The old saying goes “ it’s hard to see the forest from the trees” I think applies to George as he has been a Washington insider for over 50 years. Will he really go with Pinocchio 🤥 Joe ? What a shame.If he does, I guess he really should stay in his Ivy Tower and give soliloquy’s from the balcony ,they do sound pretty .
Beautifully said, Timothy Hurley... :)
Check out: Dan McClellan, a Bible scholar, if one enjoys a person with an admirable vocabulary.
Even as I generally hail from a more left perspective, I loved listening to him. I learned a lot and thought about every word.
Bandersnatch 2001 because he’s a liberal.
@@incontruth4116 He is a conservative unlike the idiot you voted for
@@incontruth4116 George is an actual conservative, hence why he has distanced himself from the so called "Republican Party".😉
@@incontruth4116 uiiiii
Me too. If modern conservatism actually resembled what was described by Mr. Will, I would be less opposed to it.
i long for a return from populism on the right to informed thought like this. i'm a lefty, and i miss civil debate rooted in ideals.
apagoogoo
David Horowitz, from a communist family, is an intelligent Author, Public Speaker, and wonderful conversationalists.
@@tmkatx6497 Your reply is what is considered far from able even from someone from the right like me. I suggest you correct your stance.
kc Cox Nonsense! He’s nothing but a right wing hack. Christopher Hitchens once eviscerated him in debate.
Tm Kapp If you use teens like “lefties”, then you are not even capable of rational informed discussion. Such pejorative reveal more about you than about them.
A conservative is just a right wing populist with lots of money and a thin veneer if civility.
It is so refreshing to see a man I have always respected, even when we didn’t agree, who had the chutzpah to say what he felt even when the prevailing winds were blowing the other way.
George Will is the greatest mind since Wm. F. Buckley Jr.
George Will is so smart. He has great understanding of what's going on and how things work.
George Will is an icon of consertative in USA. I do not agree some of his policies, but I admire his wisdom and his great intellicut.
His age is starting to show. But he is still very interesting to listen to and much more right than wrong. Too bad most Americans will never be able to follow his thinking when it comes to the origins on the proper role of gov't.
The majority can follow the thinking but the implications are difficult to implement. The politicians who promise more government goods get popular.
@@cleanwaternasenyiuganda8124 It has been ever thus.
In a world of Trumpism and progressivism, it's a refreshing pleasure to see and hear a conservative voice once again.
WTF? You cannot be serious? Will's brand of "Conservatism" is bending over and taking it up the rear, then asking for more, then paying the guy's cab fare back home.
Will's brand of neoconservatism brought us two endless wars, offshoring of millions of jobs, a decimated manufacturing segment, and it allowed us to cede all popular culture to the left. In other words THEY CONSERVED NOTHING. This effing fraudulent asshole.
I don't care if you don't like Donald Trump, as long as you lay out specifc grievances with policy decisions and offer realistic alternatives. He doesn't. If your critique is that Trump is a dirty dick, or a mean mean meanie, then your critique is worthless. We all know that. But I'm 100% done with neoconservative globalist bullshit.
George Will is a reflexive Never-Trumper. ALL reflexive Never-Trumpers are, by nature, intellectually dishonest feeble-minded douches. He's no different than Bill Kristol: worthless.
You cannot wait until the POTUS says something, then take the opposite view, and proceed to hold yourself up as some sort of public intellectual. He is just a pure hack.
@@rickrudd When Trump closes the border, I’ll give him credit.
Same goes for:
1. Defunding Planned Parenthood
2. Repealing Obamacare
3. Ending Common Core
4. Draining the Swamp
5. Shrinking government
6. Reining in spending
In the meantime, I'm not going to waste my time arguing with a Trumphumper. If you can't see that he is a New York liberal, I can't help you.
@@markfinley8921That is unfair on many levels, but typical of internet interactions.
A) I am anything but I Trump Humper. I went around calling everyone an idiot who supported him during the primary. I was convinced we were doomed. But I did vote for him. Why? Because look at what the left in this nation represents. It's vile.
B) Mark, I voted for W twice, for John McCain, and for Mitt Romney. I have voted for Jim Gilmore, George Allen, Ken Cuccinelli, Ed Gillespie, Bob McDonnell, and a million other Republicans.
I have never voted for a Democrat one time in my life, and given what that represents today, I never will unless they suddenly took LSD and forgot what they actually are all about. I like to call balls and strikes.
But, out of your list, the things with which I'm concerned are Immigration...immigration.
Small govt and the other things can come after immigration. Unless and until we protect our borders and prevent Dems from destroying the demography of the US, importing a whole new voting base, and permanently altering the landscape of the US electorate, it is all a moot point. We're done if they take over.
I really don't care about the wall at all, but that would be nice. I care about policy and stopping the flow of illegals. No amnesty. Deport those who flagrantly show disregard for our laws and sovereign border.
Back to George Will. He's a spineless milquetoast and truly worthless to the fight we Red Blooded Americans are fighting. Trump may not be who we wanted, but he's who we have, and there is no fight if we lose this one. President Kamala effing Harris equals Commie USA, comrade.
Yes! Margaret Thatcher slams Hayek's Constitution of Liberty on the table and exclaims, "This is what we believe!"
Donald Trump slams a copy of the National Enquirer on the table and says, "These are the real Americans".
Yeah, conservatism is under threat alright.
I voted for Ben Sasse too.
I'm sad, embarrassed, exhausted...and a little angry.
America’s treasure!!!
"Sad and embarrassed and exhausted".
I certainly hope that is true.
If not, I suspect your experiment is heading into very dark waters.
Good luck from Australia.
Michael Heins Well ve fine with Trump. Thee are bigger problems on the horizon and we’d better get our act together.
Good. But we are angry because we’ve been lied to.
I used to read him, impressed by his composition, vocabulary, attitude. Felt I was in the company of New England elite academia. But recently I listen, understand, but have no sense that what he says is original or true or applicable, as though he creates a verbal gas that alters the mind to believe something significant has been said until the spell wears off and nothing remains.
Wow! For many years I never missed his Newsweek column or Sunday morning with David Brinkley, where I thought they should all bow and let him say a lot more. His books back in those days were mostly collections of his columns. I gradually drifted away from his writing and I didn’t really know why. To me his wit is still unrivaled (except by Christopher Hitchens before he died), and his knowledge is breathtaking, but do you really think “what he says is not original or true or applicable”? What a damning thing to say.
I suppose, Mr. Steve Wagner. Are you referring to your ignorance then and mine now? My daughter would agree with you.
You are right. Will is much like William F. Buckley - well sounding, but not original, or truly substantive.
As I've said many times before, you can explain something to a liberal but you cannot comprehend it for them.
According to Deidre McCloskey, it was a shift in public rhetoric that ultimately unleashed the rise of capitalism. I've lived in Latin America for 20 years and followed it closely for 30. I see almost zero difference between Donald Trump and Hugo Chavez, in style or in substance. You think they are different because as Adam Smith said, "there is a lot of ruin in a nation" and there is much more to ruin in the U.S. It took Chavez 20 years to destroy Venezuela. It didn't happen over night. Maybe it will take a combo of MAGAs and Sanders-style socialists 50 years to destroy the U.S., but both brands of populism are a sickness that will eventually kill us. Preferring populist knuckleheads to the great ideas of our tradition is not for free, even if you don't see the cost immediately.
It's helpful for people to understand the concept of conservatism as articulated by George Will. But he still has problems, such as when claiming conservatives aren't opposed to social security. Look at the old debates, George. It was conservative Republicans opposed to this new "communist" program. Sadly, too many conservatives still react from knee-jerk, ideological positions. Yes, the GOP hijacked and abandoned the conservative principles you espouse. But you largely rooted the process on until it got away from you.
At 10:45 he cites the statistic of 77% of Americans in 1964 had faith in the government all the time or almost all the time. Only 17% now, he says.
Well it seems he completely ignores, at least on this specific point, that faith in the government was soon shattered in the few short years following 1964 by the Vietnam War and even more so ten years later in the aftermath of Watergate. That's not to say there hasn't been a continuous downward trend in "trusting the guvment" since then but I genuinely believe any reasonable scholar addressing this point of the people's trust in the government would likely conclude, quite quickly, that the decade between 1964 and 1974 is the historical catalyst which provoked a general mistrust of government that carries forward to this very day. And perhaps, though folks didn't realize it at the time, the actual flash point of this mistrust were those three shots fired in Dealey Plaza on a sunny afternoon in Dallas.
As a practical matter, I would suggest that mistrust of government is actually a good thing. A little cynicism in this area of general thought process is a healthy remedy to the stagnate and oftentimes hypnotic betrayal of one's individual liberties and pursuit of happiness in such a way that to not question government authority is to yield to the whimsical directives of government employees who too often forget that it is actually We The People who tell the government what to do. Not the other way around.
Regarding his comment on nation building: he was for it before he was against it. He's good at being a historical naysayer; pointing out what may not have worked in the past. He is less able to see how the future could be, since despite what he says, his brand of conservatism wants to keep the status quo at a minimum, or even roll back to that mythical time when everyone was a Jeffersonian farmer.
Short of time? Start at 29:00
We should all be pessimistic . Especially for the future. The 2050s will see the end or the continuation of a good country.
vkorchnoifan
Stand up for your country! Plenty of groups are doing so.
What makes you think we were ever a “good” country?
@@DredPirateRoberts@We live in a capitalist country.
vkorchnoifan An economic system doesn’t make a country good or bad. It makes it successful. What does it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world but lose his soul (Mark 8:36) Fighting for this country or any country for that matter is a lost cause seeing that the soul of every country is rotten. Save your own soul and help others to do the same.
Done with this guy.
Public intellectual?! He’s not an intellectual. He’s just a right wing corporate shill who uses big words and has a fetish about grammar. Conservatism doesn’t have an intellectual pedigree. It’s got snob appeal. The Founders were classic 18th century liberals. They were not “conservatives” at all. Liberalism really was a political philosophy once upon a time - based on notions like natural rights and limited government. Conservatism, on the hand, has never been a genuine political philosophy. It’s merely an attitude of opposition to any radical reforms that threaten the welfare of the social elite.
A true intellectual and American gem. Generations will read and be influenced by his words, and be better off for it. "No one has gotten rich betting against the United States and the American people". Amen, George
@Eat Shnitzel Eh. You would lose money, going by historical trends
@Eat Shnitzel Already making the mistake of judging US as an empire. As Afghanistan showed, US usually does not have the philosophy or appetite to expand territory and colonies. Influence, yes. But not lands, relative to historical references (e.g., Greece, Roman, Portugal, Spain, France, England, Austria, Germany, Japan, Russia, etc)
If you're using the term "empire" colloquially, and not academically, then I don't see any nation that will usurp America's #1 position in economy, GDP, per Capita wealth, military size/capability in my lifetime
@Eat Shnitzel Heh. Check the world history definition of empire, then get back to me. You just argued my point with your last two comments
@Eat Shnitzel You are incorrect. US has historically has not been an empire, which by academic definitions requires a single centralized authority. Your examples of military bases are actually an example of influence but not subjugated territories.
US, like every country, have consistent examples of it's less fortunate. It is irrelevant to it's #1 leadership ranking in per Capita wealth, GDP economy, military capability. China?? There's a reason why that country still pegs their currency (yuan) to the US dollar, lol
All of a sudden Will is the greatest thing since slice bread, wonder why ?
All of a sudden?
Leacroft Mattadeen Because he’s the “safest bet” for saying things which are soothing & comforting, yet have some historical frame of reference. Everyone else with jobs in media is either too young or too illiterate of history to be able to discuss politics without personal, emotional response.
Will's accounting of national borrowing to pay for services, around 15:45, is counterfactual. Our grandchildren cannot send goods and services back through time from the future to us now.
Generations unborn will inherit debt, it's true. They will also inherit an asset of exactly the same size: the matching credits.
Will's accounting forgets the credits, imagines time travel, ignores the actual *current* transactions which pay for present goods and service, and is thus entirely fanciful and false.
David Lloyd-Jones this is the type Will criticism that makes me giggle. The critic that criticizes Will in such a manner that exposes the critic for TOTALLY missing the point. What he’s saying (using your vernacular): IF the debt the future generation inherits has a corresponding credit that future generation will benefit from it is moral to have that future generation share in its cost. HOWEVER if we are borrowing from future generations to pay for decadent govt overreach of which the future will not see a corresponding credit, it is robbing an unborn child’s security.
@@dcj-bz4on
You are quite right that he is saying we are consuming things that haven't been made yet, enjoying services performed by people not yet born. Like you, he believes in time travel by which our descendants send these good things back to us.
I'm simply pointing out that this is not true. We can consume stuff made by our ancestors, and I think it's a damn shame that we do so much of that so carelessly. We can enjoy services performed by people who are alive right now, while they are performing them or while the result of them is still available to us. But from our children or later? Nope. Time travel doesn't work in that direction, backwards.
You are not correct to claim that he allows the "owners" of debt, the recipients of interest payments, into his argument. He ignores that side of the ledger altogether.
Enjoy your giggles. It's yourself you're laughing at.
David Lloyd-Jones-okay I admit it. You have COMPLETELY lost me on the time travel analogy....when you talk about the corresponding “credit” do you literally mean the accountancy of an account receivable? Interest due? Because yes on a balance sheet for each debt there is a corresponding asset. But if that corresponding asset is 6 million knee replacements that my niece will have to make payments on, while those knees are buried 6 feet deep under a slab of granite? That is quite different than her paying for a bridge built 20 years ago that her 25 year old self drives over every day to get to work.
Our GDP is below zero. Trump said that. 😀
David Lloyd-Jones-I’m going to try this again....@ 15:40 what Will is saying is that the future generations WILL NOT receive a corresponding credit. THATS the point. We used to spend in a way that a matching asset would apply. We are NOT spending on things the future generations will benefit from. They will get the bill but they will NOT receive the asset (or at the very least) by the time they get it, that asset will be dramatically lower in value than the bill to pay for it. As for the time travel. I can only assume that what you are saying is that future generations cannot spend money on us and “send” us the benefit/asset as we are all pushing up daisies. They don’t need to send us anything!!, We got those goods and services TODAY when we put government goods and services on the federal credit card and let the future generations to pay for it.
"Seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and all these other things shall be added to you."- Jesus (Sermon on the Mount).
While I disagree with him about Trump I love him as a great conservative thinker. His commentary on anything from politics to baseball is always insightful and sharp
George Will is the man! Maybe he should have ran for president!
Natanya Aberra hahahahahaha
Same old republican ideas .. nothing new
Bu Selma@Especially when the Koch Bros. are giving monies to them.
That is kind of how it works. The ideas come from you; not the government.
All this talk about Trump is a waste of time. Having read George's new book, he offers an imminently better discussion about important matters - and does it without mentioning the current president. Still, Judy wants to drone on about the man. I suspect she - and the other I have seen interviewing George -has not read his book.
There is only one champion of good. He was nailed to a cross 2,000 years ago by people who said, "we are the really good people". He lives on in the hearts of His followers
78 years old
And your point ?
This is my conservatism! Conservatives are not racist, thanks to liberals, but this is true conservatism. We want to conserve people from radical change with historical context knowledge. As a conservative, this type of conservative, our founding fathers saw this, the US expanded, and therefore, we conservatives need to expand. The president isn’t always the center of all decisions, this was during our founding days. Government is the center. As the US expanded, the role of the presidency grew due to the industrial revolution. Conservatives want to conserve people’s rights, while the US expanded thus the presidency as well. Presidents are just there to approve legislations and make us look cute hahaha Social security is one of the best thing the US made. Yet, conservatives vaulter to fund it, which I always bitch about. The railway system, passed by a GOP president, and also Roe v Wade was passed by a conservative Supreme Court. This is my conservatism, to which I still adhere to.
Will condemns Trumpism but his championing of negative advertising and his one sided demonizing of Obama helped bring Trumpism about.
Will defines his terms to make conservative ideas more palatable. If Will is correct, he is so far from the conservative actions today to be considered an outsider to the very cause he defends.
While Will is clearly very intelligent, articulate and well read, the simple truth is that government and free enterprise are always a balancing act. Deregulation in the financial sector (from the 1980's) led inevitably to a bonus/profit culture that created the 2008 Financial Crisis, while we were being told that such a crisis was no longer possible, because of the spread of risk. Government (i.e. you and me) then had to prop up and bail out the financial sector, which immediately complained that government should then mind its own business so they could go back to generating as much profit as possible. The NRA are lobbying against essential gun control legislation. Pharmaceutical companies exploit patents for maximum profits. Insurance companies are the same. Cartels, monopolies, etc. Humans and their thought systems are fallible, even when they aren't deliberately corrupt. Government has to watch over what happens in the private sector, while not smothering it. It's a complex balance and neither side is 'right', just essential.
You live in a fantasy world of ignorance. The financial crisis was compelled by govenment regulation, the mandating of unsustainable bad debt as a form of reality denying assuaging liberal white guilt that pretened that social utopia could be achieved if everyone were forced to believe the poor were only poor because of discrimination. The massive social experiment, building for three decades, failed, and idiots created the old reliable Marxist fiction of corporate greed. Life doesn't go bad from lack of government. It goes bad from sins of pride.
"" Not all conservatives are stupid, but all stupid people are conservative" James Stuart Mills.
You've clearly never met liberals
To have a full meaning of conservatism, Will has to include the nature of money and banking which is currently based on debt when it doesn't have to be. Debt increases through the use of leverage in the creation of new monies for loans at interest. No politicians save Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy have dealt with leverage.
It's about time!!!
Mr Will is - quite funny.
He made it to easy for poor people to have children without DADS!!!
All markets are information generating mechanisms, but all markets are is not information generating mechanisms.
Please let it happen this is the only way to wake up christians. Wake up the night templars again
Build the wall. Trump 2020
Georgie should stick to writing about baseball. When liberals love you it's not because you're conservative. But he's rich, and that's what matters.
George Will is the kind of 'conservative' that liberals love. I mean, c'mon, what kind of 'conservative' lives in DC for 50 years?
He is an expert at losing graciously. Wealthy conservatives don't really object to this. Lower-income Conservatives do.
These people are the most out of touch humans on earth. I hear the word aspen and i think. Great wealth litle thought.
The sooner it goes the of a dodo the better.
Self is a Rhino..
The T-Party would benefit from taking heed of George Will's warnings. Meanwhile democrats gotta do what democrats gotta do. Thoughtful questions, Judy. Almost indecipherable answers. "Correct me if I'm wrong."
I used to take my black baseball player friends home to only thier mom's in the nineth ward!!!
A democrat interviewing George Will. Will who thinks a conservative is only the way he thinks and wants.
I love listening to this guy. He has mastered the art of saying nothing 🥴✌️and to put him with Judy it’s bizzaro world
I’m not surprised you heard nothing.
Good!
How out of touch are you people?
I love George, but he misses one thing going on in our society. As people age they are increasingly alone, reliant on the internet for information and entertainment and angry. Its nice to think people are all doing other things besides watching tv cable news - but those "things" are not what they once were...fraternal organizations are in decline. Church engagement is in decline. Sports are teetering. Theres a reason for all of this and he does not really address it.
Ben Sasse has, however; and Will supports his take. Thing is, this country isn't in the exclusive control of the aged; it's a segment of the population, a population of endless overlapping demographics. We do lack fellowship in common interests; but those institutions share a lot of the blame for that. What's more frightening in my view is the people's predilection for seeking validation from the media for their positions -- establishment media and especially social media. No one in the media is telling the truth -- NO ONE. Which makes it the worst place in the world to go to to formulate one's opinions on any subject. The media is supposed to be the sunlight disinfecting our political institutions; it appears to be the other way around now. If consumers of media were as diligent in critiquing the media as they were in critiquing our political leadership, there'd be much more accountability for telling the truth than there is now. But there isn't. Instead we're focusing like a laser on whatever validates our biases. I find that much more deleterious to our future than the difficulty our fraternal organizations are presently having (most of which has been self-inflicted).
That is the truth. Community engagement is in decline. What do you think the reasons are which aren't addressed?
I don't like the terms conservatism and capitalism because the use of the suffix implies an ideology. Conservative is epistemological not ideological and there is no ideology to capital at all.
Lots of BS. If you cannot convince them, confuse them.
So climate change is not an issue!
Effeciency is safty.
Very insightful as always but the lens that he views the world are from a "normal" elitist perspective. He is of a generation and a very clear example of what having wealth and privilege is thinking.
Will knows best
George Will is no conservative.
Something I did not hear addressed by Mr. Will -
"You can have wealth concentrated
in the hands of a few, or you can have democracy; you cannot have
both." The late Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis.
It is?
Oh good.
Another useless scribbler. Gets invited to all the right dinners, made millions of dollars, but whenever a real conservative, which means a person who has not been miseducated about the centrality of race to the formation and survival of a nation, comes along. . . he attacks.
If he had been scribbling in Britain in 1965, he would have attacked Enoch Powell.
And there he is with Judy, the Chernenko of PBS.
Totally delusional
George Will is oh, so wrong and full of --it. Speaking as a conservative, let me tell you what conservativism is. Conservatism is a belief of preserving traditional norms and ideas and being resistant to change of traditional norms. Period. It is that simple. Why is conservatism under threat? Because of liberalism which is open to fundamental change of traditional norms and values. I could give this discussion better than George Will can.
Apostle Paul: "If any young, healthy adult refuses to work then let him not eat."
Sorry, conservatives had their shot, social democrats should get to work
Unfortunately, they already began a long time ago. It's only since Donald Trump ran for president that the left completely lost its mind and made it obvious.
Even though I deeply appreciate him, Will is proof that, even a highly intelligent man, with a deep philosophical background and no superstitious or religious beliefs, can still have blinders on when it comes to certain things
Jefferson spoke in favour of invading Canada. Not much to admire in that. Madison was in favour as well, except he had to flee out of the White House leaving his dinner on the table, as British forces came in the front door. I do not see high morals and intelligence in the Founding Fathers. They wanted independence to solidify their wealth. They designed a republic to insure their hold on power. Nothing noble here. George speaks of them as saints, and they certainly were not. Whatever Conservatives should be according to George, they are not. They are now self-serving, self-enriching, anti-democratic, bigoted and racist group who insure that those they look down on or outright dislike are kept in poverty and inequality before the law. Conservatives insure that those they deem worthy are kept in control and in wealth. 'Interference' governments seek humanity where there is none, and stable societies insure this. Unstable societies see too much wealth at the top along with too much power while social unrest brews, unrest foments and revolution brews. This isn't rocket science. Conservatives in America have spent the bank while enriching themselves, even from the public purse. There is no real money management done by Conservatives - anywhere. There will never be successful societies as long as Conservatives rule them. There is no charity, or compassion. A certainly no deference to a democratic political system at all.
Keith Carter talk about a jaded view of the founders. I think you may have missed that small point about representation in government. Everyone wants to solidify their wealth. I assume you do too. The point is freedom to keep you hard earned wealth is why the Founding Fathers put it all on the in by pledging their lives their fortunes and their sacred .... well you get the point. I think your comments are not well thought out. No they were not saints but if they were as bad as you say they would not have constructed a government of the people by the people and for the people. Moreover no citizen in America is kept in poverty. Everyone of any race has the ability to make here with a little hard work. There are examples of that everywhere. The only unrest we see is from those unwilling to work hard wanting only something for nothing. Institutional racism no longer exists and where you see the most unrest is in those cities where there are minorities in the Mayor’s office the police chief’s office and the State’s representative. I trust and sincerely hope you understand you are not expressing the problem you are the problem with America. If you even are an American as I am hopeful you are not.
And the take away lessons from Madison & Jefferson: Do..Not..Invade..Canada, nothing good will come of it. Hell iirc General Simcoe burnt the first White House down. 🇨🇦
Until President Trump exposes this con man I thought he was ok ☹️ Dummy Me.
This joker is worst than Tramp....
I used to like George, but he's just another Conservative who allows the left to define the parameters of speech and behavior. Trump is smashing that because he has the backbone to stand against the left in ways guys like Will can't. Conservatism doesn't get anywhere if it is allowed to be criminalized by the left. You might not like Trump, but he's necessary. Check out Victor Davis Hanson and let Will flap his gums on PBS.
Conservatism is doing a fine job criminalising itself, particularly as so many of them end up being indicted, convicted, and sentenced to prison for multiple felonies committed to protect conservative power. Particularly Trump and his criminal gang, several of whom are already in prison.
@@LordZontar that's laughable. The Mueller investigation committed more crimes than the criminals they caught! Meanwhile Clinton ran a pay for play foundation that dried up as soon as her career did. Indicting Russians who will never stand trial was for show. The FISA warrants alone involved more crimes. When Barr and Durham finish their work, people are going down. Trump is going to crush whichever lunatic Democrat they nominate. Buckle up.
@@mattd6086 Matt, we are not discussing things that exist solely in your imagination. Please confine discussion to the real world. You will look less like a fool doing so.
@@LordZontar cute, but idiotic nonetheless. Clinton is hopelessly corrupt. Durham is going to expose the abuses of the Mueller investigation. You can call that imaginary all you like, but it will happen soon. Get a grip.
❌💲❌The Conservative movement is dead❌💲❌