Freddie had the same look on his face he had as a kid when his parents told him Santa wasn't real when Mearsheimer explained Israel's situation to him.
JM’s popularity is a good example of the benefits of alternative media. He was rarely if ever interviewed in mainstream media but now he’s gained a large following thanks to these podcasts.
He has a ridiculous mind. He wrote in his book Great Power Tragedy He said great power competition is amoral but not immoral. Yet, he supports this amorality by speaking of containment. How hypocrite, he wants to contain but fear the leadership cool head does not prevail. He is talking about millions and millions of human lives, this is not something that you should play with. Isn't keep supporting containment and all sorts immoral indeed from humanity perspective?
The obvious question for Prof. Mearsheimer would have been: if the US doesn't have the weapons or industrial capacity to defend Ukraine or Israel, how is it going to defend Taiwan?
With difficulty but i'd guess he sees Tiawan as an actual strategic interest for the US whereas those other 2 are el i te driven vanity projects that provides zero benefit to the US.
What people forget is that Taiwan is China! It is recognized by the UN and the USA in fact. in the same way that the autonomous region of Madeira belongs to Portugal, but what we are seeing is the emergence of a narrative that Taiwan does not belong to China but does. The US has only created a way to control China on its border, the US is never on war on its on borders. the USA did not manage to stop the Houtis 😅😅😅 I think the American empire is collapsing, several empires have fallen throughout history, and the USA is just another empire. In fact, I think it is the West that is collapsing, and Asia will become the new center of the word. But let's see, now we come to an era where all the great nations have nuclear weapons which makes this situation extremely dangerous.
I think statements about running out of weapons or ammunition need to be qualified with more detail.. As I understand it most of the weapons supplied by US and allies, like the F16, are old stocks due for replacement. Still very effective but not top tier stuff. So America has its top tier weapons available for its own use. Also Ukraine has many more sources of shells including making them itself. Germany, in particular, has signed an 8.5Bn Euro framework contract with Rheinmetall to make new 155mm shells for 2025 and beyond. So there is unlikley to be a long term shortage of ammunition.
Hencewhy it is US policy to bring back semiconductor manufacturing to nearer countries or the US mainland proper, so as to let go of Taiwan once it is overwhelmed. John thinks America "should" fight back to contain China but at the same time America is worried about how costly and damaging it would be to fight China in Taiwan so close to China - there is true military fear as a war would pit billions of people against each other and the death toll on both sides would be beyond WW2 imagining. To top it off it would be the first time since the US independence war that the US mainland was targeted en masse by bombs and other weapons. This would set China and the USA back decades if not a century and give other nations like India, Brazil and Russia the chance to become the new world powers similar to the shift we witnessed through WW1 and WW2. America may hate China but at the same time it does not want to be supplanted in a similar way as it had done to supplant Britain and France in WW2 aka via the backdoor!
No. The US never stopped couping or attempting to coup countries (friendly or opposing) ever since 1948 until now. Whether they were facing off against the USSR and China or not, they have always interfered in other countries. Balances of power was never the goal for the US. Total dominance always has.
Actually, US coups started in earnest in 1893 in Hawaii and blossomed into full hegemonic zeal with the manufactured "false flag" against Spain in 1898.
@@NunyaBizness-z8f I was aware of the Hawaii scenario but not the situation with Spain. I consider those to be before the CIA era, although I believe that the CIA is a development of what they did back then.
@@andrewpienaar4522 You have described exactly what Prof Mearsheimer was saying. Total domination is the goal. States want to become as powerful as possible. The difference after 1991 and the end of the Cold War was that there was no sound logic for interventions. Establishing liberal democracy around the world was the end goal, not the quest for power. Now they are back to realpolitik due to China.
I listen to John Mearsheimer every week, so I expected this to be rather repetitive. But Freddie did a great job asking interesting questions on similar topics, opening up new aspects of the discussion. Thanks for the great interview.
The British media and their gotcha questions killed off intelligent discussions like this. Letting someone like Mearsheimer talk is much more interesting. I read 'The Tragedy of Great Power Politics' about 15 years ago. He predicted that China and the US were on a collision course. He convinced me that most British politicians had become clueless about foreign policy.
@@derosa1989 This really adds nothing and is just childish. There have been a lot of people advocating globalism, open borders, and famously 'The end of history' by Francis Fukuyama in 1992, with the idea that liberalism and free trade will result in an un-ending global utopia, this was and still is a very popular idea that has underpinned liberalism and western politics for probably longer than you have been alive, Mearsheimer pushed back on this. I guess you'll respond with books and articles you wrote about it back in that time period right?
@@HarryBuxley but that's the problem, academics write utopian theories that have very little chance of becoming reality, and then 20 years later we're supposed to treat them like they were always serious ideas? After 9/11 the critics of the war and the "greeted as liberators" stuff were ignored, and who was right? I think writers about foreign policy have a better chance of being correct by taking a position counter to the mainstream narrative than by trying to argue from first principles.
@@derosa1989 Sure I agree! but I think you need to watch more of Mearsheimer to understand his position and ideas, because he has never argued for a 'political theory of everything' or anything close, his IR/realism is closer to a very simplified game theory approach, that there are some fundamental incentives that will drive things when the high minded academic theories fall apart. He purposely keeps his model simple and limited to avoid that exact thing of over-estimating your planning power, focusing instead on the very narrow fundamental incentives of nations, which don't always appear, especially in the good times. Your initial comment seemed very dismissive of this but IMO he is a clear thinker who focuses on some relevant things and he has been doing it consistently for a long time when its been against the dogma.
Freddie this was a MUCH better interview than the previous. The tone was more open and congenial. You asked challenging questions but seemed to really listen and take in the responses. Thanks for this.
At one point Mersheimer throws it in Freddie's face "SO PEOPLE LIKE YOU CAN MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT-" and they cut to Freddie so you can see him just smiling thinking "I'm interviewing you, you dope. I'm supposed to pose you tough questions."
It gives us hope that Professor Mearsheimer is not giving up, even though he is one of the few people who has enough civil courage to tell the truth. The rest of scientists in the West faithfully follow the propaganda and care about their careers.
He's very unrealistic on The Far East.. The US's best, and probably only real hope of dominating China is to pull out of Taiwan and S. Korea and bankrupt them after rebuilding everything it needs in America, especially electronics and of course microchip fabrication facilities. Even relocating to Japan is too risky. The war it should fight is a covert industrial sabotage war on China's growing chip fab. factories.
He is not telling the truth .... he is a Russian apologist. His NATO excuse to justify Russia invading Ukraine is absurd. Russia is already surrounded by NATO countries and as such Ukraine joining NATO is largely irrelevant.
Honestly! The conservatives have such a blind spot for anyth8ng Israel, they've made the mistake of believing their own propaganda and the Israeli hasbara. Huge mistake.
@@786Plotinus Im American, and I can’t believe our government and majority of people still believe United States is only power house. IsNotReal is using USA like used up tampon destroying any credibility to the world, it makes sense now what small group of people started Fedreal Reserve in 1913. Also IsNotReal accept USA funds but use their own currency. IsNotReal know dollar is going to $hit within next 30-50 years. It takes time to be a superpower and luck. The main reason why USA was able to become a superpower simply didn’t have to deal with World War I or World War II destruction in the United States. China was still the laughing stock of the century until 2017.
@@mithrandirthegrey7644You would if computer chip factories are closed or destroyed. All US auto manufacturers,high tech companies in US and imports from Asia will stop.
What was never discussed was what I call the 'offshore empire' - the vast riches of the globalists parked offshore and their massive influence across the western world. The American republic and europe has been bled out out by this empire but it is very rarely discussed, despite the use of the US armed forces to do their bidding alongside mercenaries.
@@JLSMaytham Eh.. Rome lasted as an Empire for another 1.500 years. Meanwhile the US doesn't seem to mirror its path of trajectory- it enjoyed a Rome status during the 1990s and 2000s, but the rest of the world is too developed to allow complete dominance ever again. Rome had a massive technological and civilizational advantage. The US for the most part does not.
The Roman Republic was worse than the Roman empire. With consuls of only a one year term limit everyone needed to get their little war in. With emperor's some actually focused on not expanding and maintaining the empire and weren't too warlike. Democracy, republic, and any other system with short term limits is inherently violent
What a breathe of fresh air, finally there is someone telling it like it is. Not some autocracy vs democracy nonsense, really an insult on people's intellect.
I think the US had some bad experiences where they backed dictators but then it bit them in the ass, like with Saddam. So I do think they prefer democracies as they consider them more stable and predictable.
Israel is not in same league as Saudi Arabia on that autocracy scale, Israel is democracy but is a heard state, and monarchy by definition is absolutist form of government.@@888YangJi
@@ravibasera1 Israel an apartheid state with widespread human rights abuse and a national policy for ethnic cleansing. Those Israeli citizens whom are against Netanyahu and his cronies had left the country in despair. Hardly a liberal democracy in my book. If you believe it is, you are just in denial of reality.
Mearsheimer is very interesting. Thank you for having him on and thank you for asking good questions. I would love to listen to you have a discussion with him about the US election after it is over!
The problem is . . . Taiwan is recognized as a part of China by the international community. The US has no legal basis on which to intervene in a China-Taiwan war. So, sending US troops to defend Taiwan is essentially a "liberal war."
No worry. America will never ever win a war to fight China. Remember the Korea war? China was so weak so poor so undeveloped and millions of its people died hunger at that time but still managed to win the war against American. Now China is a superpower. In the future there won't be a war between China and the U. S. simply because America has no courage to fight China. America has lost many wars even fighting very small, weak, and very poor nations. Like it or not it Is a fact.goodbye uncle Sam.
It's hilarious, it's basically *exactly* the mirror image of the situation in Ukraine - with the US taking *exactly* the same stance here, which they criticised Russia for with respect to Ukraine. In fact, the only substantial difference is that, rather than being on the US' doorstep (as Crimea/the Donbas/Luhansk are, with respect to Russia), Taiwan is practically on the other side of the World from Washington DC, completely undermining any similar mitigating arguments the US could make, such as threats to national security, or protection of culturally/ethnically similar people. It absolutely baffles the mind how people can manage the mental gymnastics necessary to support the US stance with respect to Ukraine, whilst simultaneously criticising China when it comes to Taiwan.
A great interview. If only mainstream media were to run interviews like this - that way more of the public would be better informed, less the victim of government propaganda, and better able to think more critically about really important issues on foreign policy.
Freddie is emotionally on Israel's side which wouldn't be wrong if he expressed it openly. He became almost confrontational with Mearsheimer when the professor laid out the facts regarding Israel's genocidal policy and military constraints.
It's not about military dominance; it's about the population market. The US needs to figure out how to make at least 500 million people buy their expensive products. China has surpassed US technology with their cheaper and more advanced technology. I'm not sure how the US will persuade Asians to buy US expensive products instead of the cheaper and advanced Chinese alternatives.
It’s a great tragedy that the majority of the British political media class share Freddy’s mind set. I do admire the fact that he at least appears to concede to mearshimers intellectual superiority.
Lol. Johann von der Mearsheimer superiority in what exactly? He is good in reminding us that we humans are driven primarily by selfish interests for power and domination. NOthing new. Its good that liberals are reminded of that, but nothin new.
It is because Freddie is too close to the English establishment. Their view is delusional, but it radiates out and distorts others' sense of normality.
As ever, after listening to John Mearsheimer, one is enlightened and melancholy, often in equal measures. And, I, for one, learn so much about how to present one's views in a humane, polite, yet thoroughly analytical manner. Thanks to both of you for presenting this interview. And the big take-away: the world is in a mess, yet we can derive contentment and fulfillment from our small, everyday interactions with family, friends, neighbors, colleagues. And, who knows, perhaps this courteous, civil and respectful way of discussion will filter up to our leaders. (Well, I am not holding my breath!)
During many decades nobody interviewed Mearsheimer. Then he found the podcasts and he is being interviewed too often. Still Freddie asks very good questions by pushing the guest. I wish Freddie would have framed his questions even better: * "Given that Israel wants the land and wants to get rid of the Palestinians, is Israel's strategy rational?" or "Is there any Israeli objective that would make the Israeli action rational?" * "How much would Europe-Russia relationships influence Putin's willingness to negotiate. If the NordStream came back online and the Russian central bank money were returned, would that influence the negotiated outcome materially?"
As for the second question - I think you just need to listen why Putin says. In most cases he does exactly what he says. so he is quite honest. There is one main reason why new territory (excluding Crimea) is important for him now : 1) people who live currently there (e.g. in Mariupol) maybe will be killed or smth like that because they are "collaborants" if those territories go back to Ukraine. It's what Ukraninian officials really said. 2) As for Cimea - in addition to the previous argument, majority of people are Russians and also Russian fleet is there in Sevastopol. But again, general concern for Russia was and is Ukraninan neutrality/not joining NATO. You can find an interview of David Arakhmia who was (not sure maybe still is) the leader of Zelenskiy's party fraction in Rada (parliament) participated in negotiations with Russia in Istanbul in April 2022. He told that that was the neutrality was the main point for Russians, they were OK to move back to pre-24 Feb 2022 border.
Nato? I don't think so... The West is obsessed with Crimea ( for realistic reasons 😊)... it's not the first time it tried a takeover of that strategic peninsula. This time, it used benighted ukraine and sacrificed it,the previous time it was the decaying Ottoman empire and sacrificed that one - no remorse on either count 😊
Greater Israel, as the IDF insignia clearly illustrates, is not only Gaza and the West Bank but also includes parts of all the surrounding countries, ie Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Iran, Jordan etc, etc, so they have made it very clear that their actions are nor defensive in nature. The IDF should change its acronym to the IAF.
@@Tom-kt8lu The IDF in Gaza are wearing an insignia that shows a map of greater Israel, which includes all the countries I mentioned, there many examples online.
Always extremely stimulating listening to Professor Mearsheimer. Thanks Freddie, from Cody, Wyoming. In 1999, I was flying empty 767 and 747 freighters to Hong Kong and flying them at max gross weight to Anchorage and Louisville. I mentioned to some people that we consumers in west were funding China’s military growth that would threaten us. They looked at me like I had 2 heads. I don’t believe the US will be successful in containing PRC. We need to be careful not to end in nuclear war. The Chinese have figured out what they need to do. Mearsheimer isn’t bringing new ideas. They read Sun Tzu and Machiavelli .
I think he's a bit of a sadomasochist. He seems to relish the prospect that we're all doomed. Does he not realise that we can avoid the inevitable consequences of realism, where it's "the state uber alles", by simply abolishing the states system.
If you have 2 functioning eyeballs in your head you should have reached that conclusion ages ago all by yourself! And like he said, he didn't even touch on domestic politics yet! 😂😂
Exponentially harder if you have John speaking on geopolitics and Chris Hedges on domestic policies and failures. Just almost nihilistic, but I wouldn't want anything less than the turth.
As a realist I am of the opinion that it's not humanly or realistic for 4% of the world population to dominate the rest of the world population. It's therefore, more realistic to pursue a policy of peaceful cooperation and co-existence amount all countries on earth and thus occur the moral high ground? Or being on the right side of history?
Mearsheimers point of view is spot on every single topic I look at, he’s probably the one of the few ppl on the internet I could agree with on all topics, basically all he does is lay out the facts n keeps it real no bias at all.
I want to thank Freddy for the great interaction and for not giving John an easy time, which forces John to explain himself better, leading to more understanding of how John is thinking, when compared to many other interviews. I want to thank John for keeping his calm and explaining hist position patiently and carefully, and makings sense. His analytical view does not mix up understanding and agreement, which is refreshing.
28:57 "The US goverment will go to great lengths to manipulate the discourse on what is going on in ways that represent China as a mortal threat and therefore give the american puplic powerful incentives to support the war ...to include participating in the fighting". People should become immune to fear-mongering by the authorities and the fearmongers should be silenced immediately 🙂. As long as people fear and see enemies, we live in a lie. Humanity should step to the next level. How would that happen?
Excellent questions and one of the best episodes so far. Weell done! Thanks to both of the participants!!!! Thank you for such a high level of interaction, and all of that on good old YT!!!! Looking forward to a post US elections episode. Thanks
The (USA) America call it "Liberation" instead of "Invasion". That was what US call it in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the list goes on... Instances of the United States "liberated", overthrowing or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government) China 1949 to early 1960s Albania 1949-53 East Germany 1950s Iran 1953 * Guatemala 1954 * Costa Rica mid-1950s Syria 1956-7 Egypt 1957 Indonesia 1957-8 British Guiana 1953-64 * Iraq 1963 * North Vietnam 1945-73 Cambodia 1955-70 * Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 * Ecuador 1960-63 * Congo 1960 * France 1965 Brazil 1962-64 * Dominican Republic 1963 * Cuba 1959 to present Bolivia 1964 * Indonesia 1965 * Ghana 1966 * Chile 1964-73 * Greece 1967 * Costa Rica 1970-71 Bolivia 1971 * Australia 1973-75 * Angola 1975, 1980s Zaire 1975 Portugal 1974-76 * Jamaica 1976-80 * Seychelles 1979-81 Chad 1981-82 * Grenada 1983 * South Yemen 1982-84 Suriname 1982-84 Fiji 1987 * Libya 1980s Nicaragua 1981-90 * Panama 1989 * Bulgaria 1990 * Albania 1991 * Iraq 1991 Afghanistan 1980s * Somalia 1993 Yugoslavia 1999-2000 * Ecuador 2000 * Afghanistan 2001 * Venezuela 2002 * Iraq 2003 * Haiti 2004 * Somalia 2007 to present Honduras 2009 * Libya 2011 * Syria 2012 Ukraine 2014 * Venezuela 2019 Pakistan 2022 * Haiti 2022 *
The thing that bothers me about the amoral stance towards the world is where the hell does this end up taking us as a species? We're just locked into whatever game theoretically optimal strategy is of the moment, and we just roll with the ugliness as it unfolds.
If I may give my humble view on this maybe it will resonate with you... More than one perspective can be true simultaneously. The realist amoral perspective is looking at things from the outside in. Real change has to come from the inside and travel out. The realist worldview explains the world we're living in from a valid perspective. But positive change that can start within you and I have the potential to spread and travel outwards through inspiration and love. World leaders may act according to realist principles but they are also capable of acting from a place of human decency and love. Trust is a powerful thing that ultimately benefits all of humanity. The two perspectives are not necessarily contradictory even if it seems like that sometimes.
@@Poppillon We're in overshoot in a whole bunch of areas of sustainability, we're going to run out of oil in the next 100 years, and we've having a lot of difficulty transitioning to whatever is supposed to replace that. If we keep doing whatever we're doing we will be cooking ourselves as we scramble over the last reserves, and dealing with a massive contraction of this current world as food production becomes increasingly difficult and nations/ local geographical alliances start becoming isolationist. We're building AI that is most likely going to lead to a winner-takes-all scenario, while risking terminal race conditions in which AI will optimize under large scale militaristic conflicts, and everyone is incentivized to push on with this insane paradigm with most people being totally oblivious about the main drivers of the world and the boarder implications of their everyday actions. People are also just living in a magical fantasy version of reality because of how uncomfortable challenging their assumptions and culturally inherited perspective is. "Positive change starts with you" isn't a remedy to the tragedy, as far as I can tell. It essentially doesn't matter what any individual does within a system so overdetermined towards competitive outcomes unless they are somehow able to catalyze a shift away from that. I think that unless we have a serious intentional push together in a direction informed by our ideals, but not bound to magical thinking, we will be chewed up by horror towards the end of this century. I grant that future predicting is a hopeless game, but when I look at the seriousness of what we will have to contend with, and the way we are behaving - I wonder what is even the smallest glimmer of hope when this unfolds over the next 70 years. The realist view is a clearer view of the world than most out there, but I don't think it follows up on what the implications of that are as we are forced to deal with an end to fossil fuels, and the negative externalities of a species acting as it is on a global scale. Many things are true simultaneously, but reality is the ultimate arbiter of the consequences of our actions. If we're not sufficiently mapping the landscape that we're plotting a trajectory on, both as individuals and as groups, then we will hit a wall that we did not foresee as we run faster and faster through the mess we're making for ourselves.
@@riffking2651 we have never been clever enough to predict the future. Fixing the world by pursuing an ideology, sometimes even a very positive one, has been tried many times with catastrophic consequences. You cannot live your life focusing on a problem without becoming a part of the problem. Sure, a person can make a difference, even a great difference, but always by focusing on a positive vision, never by focusing on the problem. If you don't have a positive vision you will become part of the problem. Better to focus on the things you can fix, large or small, and do it with an attitude of positivity. That will be enough. The world is inhabited by individuals. Individual growth is inspiring. Inspirational people inspire other people around them. We lift others by growing ourselves. That is where real change begin
Human beings don't think of "we" in terms of the human species, and neither do they act "as a species". "We" means my family, my tribe, my nation or the fellow-followers of my religion. In my view, any expectation of a "species-wide" agreed course of action is doomed to disappointment.
I heard more truths expressed by this intelligent, thoughtful man, than from most of today’s so called leaders. The world would be a far safer, saner place if more people like this man were listened to and heeded. Thank you for interviewing him. Enjoyed this
At some point one realises that FS just doesn't want to believe JM's take on Israel being driven, rather than driving. A couple of feeble attempts to counter....but then Realism wins! I just love JM's way of thinking and getting his points across, without ever being rude or condescending. A truly great mind and man.
@1:00:55 refreshing to hear Mearsheimer’s realism about Trump, as opposed to all the dumb Trump fanatics who continue to deny his neocon-Zionist and deep state policies.
The irony is that we are here today and the situation is depressing like the professor says precisely because of one country trying to dominate the world. This is what happens. People will not over the long term go along with that. Stop trying to dominate and get along and things might change.
2:59 Mearshimer is right from one perspective, the Anglo American one. However his understanding of China and applying Anglo American Hegemony logic on Asia is a puzzle piece that don't fit. He should prove by logic and inference how Hegemonic Imperialism fit onto China because he still never managed to do it. Jeffrey Sachs knows this very well and they talk about it but Mearshimer still don't understand Chinese logic.
@@jzNottobee Except that things he says explain the vast majority of everything that has been going on and where it is heading. He has a terrific track record. A pretty good ivory tower.
You are messing up definitions. The opposite of Realism is Liberalism. They are policies, not realities; both are delusional, as it is delusion that motivates nations to fight.
@Kefuddle Los Estados Unidos spends 13.3% of its GDP on defense (the data for 2023). It spends more on defense than the next eleven largest military spenders in the world put together.
15:40 The overall idea of Offensive Realism is: a powerful country must dominate and become hegemon. But according to China history, I can tell you that's not true. You need to understand what are 王道 (the Way of the King) Vs 霸道 (the Way of the Hegemon) in Confucianism ideas before you predict the way of China will do. There has the other way to behave as a globe great power. In fact, China was rise peacefully in last 40 years and was achieved remarkable economic success. There is no reason that China to launch a war to destroy her own successful way. 27:33 No, it won’t. The United States will not fight to die to defense Taiwan because Taiwan is not their core interest. The core interests of the United States are the core interests of the Israel Lobby, Middle East are their core interest. But for the Chinese, unification of China is a common goal for every Chinese in Mainland China. You should know very well about that Dr. Mearsheimer. 47:02 if the Two-State solution doesn’t work, try One Country Two Systems solution.
I was confused about Iron Dome too. It seems to have been very effective but it's true that if challenged for long enough it would run out kof ammunition. I think there is a laser based system that would be cheaper to run but I don't know if would deal with large missiles. Then there are rail guns ...
@@zotriczaoh7098 Not quite, as Professor John Mearsheimer said some got through, and U.S knows which is why they gave them the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system. Iran has some advanced missiles of their own, it would be better for Israel to resolve the situation for the Palestinians than escalate this further.
@@zotriczaoh7098It is ineffective. In April Iran succesfully over satured it with drones and got through, even though the Jordanians, the USA, the Brits and France supported in air. In October there is plenty of footage showing that Most missiles got through. 50% at least, more like 70+%. Its a great system against self build Humus rockets or from older rockets hizbollah used in the past. Air defence system in every Western country, including ISR isnt great. Thats easily explained by the simple fact that these companies couldnt make profit in that area so they dont research and produce.
Iran has hypersonics, the iron dome can only deal with ballistic trajecrories. They got through in large numbers. The military censor stopped the info getting out . @@zotriczaoh7098
someone needs to ask mearsheimer, can realist states realise that constant escalation to stay on top or contain is likely to lead to only constant war, so under realism, can great powers ever enter peaceful co-operative co-existence.
I think you’ve answered your own question, relative peace only occurs when one state has overwhelming power, and in that case we will still see abuse of power by the controlling state. So, in that case I don’t think there will ever be full cooperative true power sharing worldwide peace.
@@georgegirraffe9900 i hear what you are saying, but my question is to go beyond this. we know under the realist model, they can't stop. BUT can they stop if they reflect on the realist model and where it is taking them? i feel that sort of reflection, WHEN presented with your own actions (all parties involved have to share this reflection via UN negotiations for example), should they not be able to stop? I'd really like Mearsheimer to answer that. i repeat, i understand under the realist model they can't and should not stop, but the fact that Mearsheimer (and realists like him) are here spelling this out to all these 'great powers', this should be like breaking the 4th wall for them, making them LOOK at themselves? Thus under this consideration it makes sense to me that an evolution can take place, moving away from the realist reactionary nature? i do believe in a version of free will which can take place under the circumstances of receiving enough information. most times we are slaves to our nature, but with enough information, free will of a sort can be exerted. Mearsheimer is here to provide that insight to them. surely the great powers could change their natures with this information?
So, this inevitably leads to a Hobbesian Leviathan style dictatorship and, in its final expression, a global dictatorship. Isn't that the case ? After all, regional domination must lead to total domination and that is quite the terrifying thought. The 'might is right' philosophy can only lead to misery for most people I think. We need cooperation and mutual understanding of potential consequences of such philosophies like these and we do that via discourse and study of such matters. And that doesn't mean a small bunch of idiots controlling us.
Biden would have been asleep all the time. John tells people how the world really is, and avoids blowing smoke up their ass or conveniently overlooking the historic aspects which led us to today's pretty pass. In sabotaging Germany and the EU, the US really damaged itself more lastingly than they yet realise.
If Dr. Mearsheimer was working at my university I would definitely change majors. What an excellent mind. I have a new political speaker with a clear, realistic approach to laying out facts that I highly appreciate and will listen to with pleasure from now on. 58:46 “I think that the decision that was made in April 2008 to bring Ukraine into NATO, which precipitated this crisis and this war, was one the most catastrophic decisions made in modern history by a great power.” - brilliant!
The interviewer did a great job here. I thought he teased some contradiction from Mearsheimer early. Far more interesting to listen to John speak in this setting than when he appears on “far left” channels.
I would really like to know if, during his recent stay in China, he really told them that he finds it very desirable that the United States defend Taiwan at all costs. I don't think so!
I was trying to figure this out too. But i think this is an academic theory and what he says is applied to the audience. I don't think these are personal beliefs or contradictions as so much a defence of the Realist principles.
"To have an American give a non-friendly nation advice on how to culturally compete with Americans, won't that make many Americans feel uncomfortable?" That is such a British assumption 😂
John's facial expression when Freddie is trying to make the argument that Israel has been successful is priceless. He's like how deluded can you be to even ask such question.
Freddie is inside Hasbara thought which is messianic. Mearsheimer’s realist theory concerns great powers in the world system. Israel is not a great power, so Freddie’s questions on this subject are almost always beside the point.
"Maybe if we just call everything we don't like 'colonialism,' regardless of how much like colonialism it is, people will be tricked into assuming it's equivalent somehow."
@@billusher2265 I don't care if he supports, I care what words we use to describe things to try and make associations in people's minds. People are just grabbing whatever "bad" words they can find and sticking them to everything they don't like.
@@twelvecatsinatrenchcoat yeah, like calling Russia colonialist and its non-Russian territories as colonies, though Russia never was colinail, but a;ways a classic land empire, where a;; part are constituent part of the country, and all residents have the same ctitizenship, not like in colonies without any rights
It's good to finally see Freddy showing some respect for John Mearsheimer. This is the 3rd interview I have watched and in the 2nd one, Freddy was very rude, curt, even sarcastic, undermining this accomplished intellectual, asking really loaded and unanswerable questions. He seemed inpatient and frustrated. John of course handled him professionally and respectfully. I actually switched it off halfway through. Here Freddy's penny has clearly dropped and he's asking fantastic questions that I/we want asked like...'Do you say that in China?' Haha good stuff!
The notion that, during the "unipolar moment", the US was all about liberal values, idealism and spreading democracy is trash. Rampant pursuit of economic and military hegemony is not "liberalism", and John Mearsheimer knows this.
Mearsheimer is so wrong when he talks about China. He says he’s not worried about who wins a war with China because that’s far off. I don’t know why he doesn’t get this but if the US and China ever go to war it will end in a nuclear exchange just like it would with the US and Russia. He also says that realism is based on the idea that a country’s survival should be the most important consideration in any situation. Ok, that makes sense BUT going to war with China over Taiwan threatens our survival. When it comes to China he cares more about US DOMINANCE than he does about our survival as a nation. He is a walking contradiction. He is correct when he talks about Russia and the Middle East. When he talks about China he is a nationalist neocon. That is my REALIST view of this man.
Phillip doesn't understand the difference between what JM thinks his theory predicts, and what he would LIKE to happen - in an idealist pacifist fairy tale utopia world. He even says in the video that he quote "hopes it doesn't come to that" ( US - China conflict over Taiwan )
On the Taiwan question, John should explicitly put out the same warning that he did regarding the expansion of NATO posing an existential threat for Russia and Putin as applied to the US's increased military support of Taiwan, Japan and S. Korea in posing an existential for China and Xi. Containment might be an accurate realist strategy for state hegemony purposes, but the benefit of maintaining neutral buffer states to avoid hot and wasteful wars might equally be a cogent strategy for maintaining the peace and avoiding nuclear escalation. John's realist theories must leave room for pro-actively avoiding the potential destruction of humanity.
This host say “misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan” @10:23. Is he CRAZY. MISADVENTURES??? Thousands of innocent civilians in those countries died by the hands of the West who had no business being there never mind the American troops who gave their life for these “misadventures”
But here is the problem with the theme that US invasion of Iraq was for liberal reasons; why not invade Cuba and liberate Cuban people instead of Iraq? I guess because there is no oil in Cuba!! So even during the unipolar moment, the adventures were still based on purely vital interests considerations, of course with the facade of liberal values!!
Great discussion. Please have a discussion about European politics since they seem like the ultimate looser in the coming reconfiguration of global politics.
Freddie had the same look on his face he had as a kid when his parents told him Santa wasn't real when Mearsheimer explained Israel's situation to him.
Bingo
He still repeated the msm propaganda like its the truth, so naive
😂😂😂😂😂😂
😂😂
Freddie comes across as a wierdo
JM’s popularity is a good example of the benefits of alternative media. He was rarely if ever interviewed in mainstream media but now he’s gained a large following thanks to these podcasts.
A large one indeed, he commands your attention
He was already renowned in 2014 when he predicted the Ukraine war was going to happen. People just finally caught up.
@@zartic4life that was partly because of his viral lecture.
Amen
He has a ridiculous mind.
He wrote in his book Great Power Tragedy
He said great power competition is amoral but not immoral.
Yet, he supports this amorality by speaking of containment.
How hypocrite, he wants to contain but fear the leadership cool head does not prevail.
He is talking about millions and millions of human lives, this is not something that you should play with.
Isn't keep supporting containment and all sorts immoral indeed from humanity perspective?
The obvious question for Prof. Mearsheimer would have been: if the US doesn't have the weapons or industrial capacity to defend Ukraine or Israel, how is it going to defend Taiwan?
Unfortunately when it comes to China, Mearsheimer's a neocon. He makes good analysis about Ukraine war, and Israel's war, but he fears China.
With difficulty but i'd guess he sees Tiawan as an actual strategic interest for the US whereas those other 2 are el i te driven vanity projects that provides zero benefit to the US.
What people forget is that Taiwan is China! It is recognized by the UN and the USA in fact. in the same way that the autonomous region of Madeira belongs to Portugal, but what we are seeing is the emergence of a narrative that Taiwan does not belong to China but does. The US has only created a way to control China on its border, the US is never on war on its on borders. the USA did not manage to stop the Houtis 😅😅😅 I think the American empire is collapsing, several empires have fallen throughout history, and the USA is just another empire. In fact, I think it is the West that is collapsing, and Asia will become the new center of the word. But let's see, now we come to an era where all the great nations have nuclear weapons which makes this situation extremely dangerous.
I think statements about running out of weapons or ammunition need to be qualified with more detail.. As I understand it most of the weapons supplied by US and allies, like the F16, are old stocks due for replacement. Still very effective but not top tier stuff. So America has its top tier weapons available for its own use. Also Ukraine has many more sources of shells including making them itself. Germany, in particular, has signed an 8.5Bn Euro framework contract with Rheinmetall to make new 155mm shells for 2025 and beyond. So there is unlikley to be a long term shortage of ammunition.
Hencewhy it is US policy to bring back semiconductor manufacturing to nearer countries or the US mainland proper, so as to let go of Taiwan once it is overwhelmed. John thinks America "should" fight back to contain China but at the same time America is worried about how costly and damaging it would be to fight China in Taiwan so close to China - there is true military fear as a war would pit billions of people against each other and the death toll on both sides would be beyond WW2 imagining. To top it off it would be the first time since the US independence war that the US mainland was targeted en masse by bombs and other weapons. This would set China and the USA back decades if not a century and give other nations like India, Brazil and Russia the chance to become the new world powers similar to the shift we witnessed through WW1 and WW2. America may hate China but at the same time it does not want to be supplanted in a similar way as it had done to supplant Britain and France in WW2 aka via the backdoor!
No.
The US never stopped couping or attempting to coup countries (friendly or opposing) ever since 1948 until now.
Whether they were facing off against the USSR and China or not, they have always interfered in other countries.
Balances of power was never the goal for the US.
Total dominance always has.
And that is pure Psychopath behaviour- control, exploit, dominate, kill
Actually, US coups started in earnest in 1893 in Hawaii and blossomed into full hegemonic zeal with the manufactured "false flag" against Spain in 1898.
Profoundly true!
@@NunyaBizness-z8f
I was aware of the Hawaii scenario but not the situation with Spain.
I consider those to be before the CIA era, although I believe that the CIA is a development of what they did back then.
@@andrewpienaar4522 You have described exactly what Prof Mearsheimer was saying. Total domination is the goal. States want to become as powerful as possible. The difference after 1991 and the end of the Cold War was that there was no sound logic for interventions. Establishing liberal democracy around the world was the end goal, not the quest for power. Now they are back to realpolitik due to China.
A masterclass on how to hold a respectful discussion while having serious disagreement. A lost art indeed. Kudos to both.
more like a respectful convo with a braindead zombie without slapping him
UnHerd is not a serious.
I listen to John Mearsheimer every week, so I expected this to be rather repetitive. But Freddie did a great job asking interesting questions on similar topics, opening up new aspects of the discussion. Thanks for the great interview.
The British media and their gotcha questions killed off intelligent discussions like this. Letting someone like Mearsheimer talk is much more interesting. I read 'The Tragedy of Great Power Politics' about 15 years ago. He predicted that China and the US were on a collision course. He convinced me that most British politicians had become clueless about foreign policy.
You’re right. They, BBC , are just hostile and don’t let the interviewee make his points.
wow he predicted the two largest economies would be in conflict? must have travelled back from the future to be such a fortune teller!
@@derosa1989 This really adds nothing and is just childish. There have been a lot of people advocating globalism, open borders, and famously 'The end of history' by Francis Fukuyama in 1992, with the idea that liberalism and free trade will result in an un-ending global utopia, this was and still is a very popular idea that has underpinned liberalism and western politics for probably longer than you have been alive, Mearsheimer pushed back on this. I guess you'll respond with books and articles you wrote about it back in that time period right?
@@HarryBuxley but that's the problem, academics write utopian theories that have very little chance of becoming reality, and then 20 years later we're supposed to treat them like they were always serious ideas? After 9/11 the critics of the war and the "greeted as liberators" stuff were ignored, and who was right? I think writers about foreign policy have a better chance of being correct by taking a position counter to the mainstream narrative than by trying to argue from first principles.
@@derosa1989 Sure I agree! but I think you need to watch more of Mearsheimer to understand his position and ideas, because he has never argued for a 'political theory of everything' or anything close, his IR/realism is closer to a very simplified game theory approach, that there are some fundamental incentives that will drive things when the high minded academic theories fall apart.
He purposely keeps his model simple and limited to avoid that exact thing of over-estimating your planning power, focusing instead on the very narrow fundamental incentives of nations, which don't always appear, especially in the good times. Your initial comment seemed very dismissive of this but IMO he is a clear thinker who focuses on some relevant things and he has been doing it consistently for a long time when its been against the dogma.
Freddie this was a MUCH better interview than the previous. The tone was more open and congenial. You asked challenging questions but seemed to really listen and take in the responses. Thanks for this.
At one point Mersheimer throws it in Freddie's face "SO PEOPLE LIKE YOU CAN MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT-" and they cut to Freddie so you can see him just smiling thinking "I'm interviewing you, you dope. I'm supposed to pose you tough questions."
@@mojojojo1529what's the difference?
@mojojojo1529 thank you
Excellent discussion and as always Professor Mearsheimer was brilliant.
It gives us hope that Professor Mearsheimer is not giving up, even though he is one of the few people who has enough civil courage to tell the truth. The rest of scientists in the West faithfully follow the propaganda and care about their careers.
He's very unrealistic on The Far East.. The US's best, and probably only real hope of dominating China is to pull out of Taiwan and S. Korea and bankrupt them after rebuilding everything it needs in America, especially electronics and of course microchip fabrication facilities. Even relocating to Japan is too risky. The war it should fight is a covert industrial sabotage war on China's growing chip fab. factories.
He is not telling the truth .... he is a Russian apologist. His NATO excuse to justify Russia invading Ukraine is absurd. Russia is already surrounded by NATO countries and as such Ukraine joining NATO is largely irrelevant.
Mearsheimer's jaw drops at the 40 minute mark when Freddie says that Israel silenced Iran 🤣
Lolll yah... Freddie is a goof with anything on Israel.
Honestly! The conservatives have such a blind spot for anyth8ng Israel, they've made the mistake of believing their own propaganda and the Israeli hasbara. Huge mistake.
@@786Plotinus it’s the main media, full of sugar with no vegetables. Thank God for the Internet.
@@parkforest434 you're right. It's just that it's so infantile.
@@786Plotinus Im American, and I can’t believe our government and majority of people still believe United States is only power house.
IsNotReal is using USA like used up tampon destroying any credibility to the world, it makes sense now what small group of people started Fedreal Reserve in 1913. Also IsNotReal accept USA funds but use their own currency. IsNotReal know dollar is going to $hit within next 30-50 years.
It takes time to be a superpower and luck.
The main reason why USA was able to become a superpower simply didn’t have to deal with World War I or World War II destruction in the United States.
China was still the laughing stock of the century until 2017.
Mearsheimer, excellent as always. People have trouble coping with hearing the truth.
Idk.. As an American I don't give single solitary hoot about Taiwan.
@mithrandirthegrey7644
The semiconductor plants in arizona , new york , ohio and Texas are underway.
@@mithrandirthegrey7644 but our corporate owners sure do
@@joeyjoejoe314 Of course, after all they are serving their own interests.
@@mithrandirthegrey7644You would if computer chip factories are closed or destroyed. All US auto manufacturers,high tech companies in US and imports from Asia will stop.
1:03:40
Professor Mearsheimer quietly acknowledges that the American Republic has succumbed to the American Empire.
think it's been an empire since end of ww2. and nimrod would ve pur to shame with the level of global control it commands
What was never discussed was what I call the 'offshore empire' - the vast riches of the globalists parked offshore and their massive influence across the western world. The American republic and europe has been bled out out by this empire but it is very rarely discussed, despite the use of the US armed forces to do their bidding alongside mercenaries.
As did the Roman Republic, just before crumbling in a mess.
@@JLSMaytham
Eh.. Rome lasted as an Empire for another 1.500 years.
Meanwhile the US doesn't seem to mirror its path of trajectory- it enjoyed a Rome status during the 1990s and 2000s, but the rest of the world is too developed to allow complete dominance ever again.
Rome had a massive technological and civilizational advantage. The US for the most part does not.
The Roman Republic was worse than the Roman empire. With consuls of only a one year term limit everyone needed to get their little war in. With emperor's some actually focused on not expanding and maintaining the empire and weren't too warlike. Democracy, republic, and any other system with short term limits is inherently violent
What a breathe of fresh air, finally there is someone telling it like it is. Not some autocracy vs democracy nonsense, really an insult on people's intellect.
So, it’s a world of jungle
I think the US had some bad experiences where they backed dictators but then it bit them in the ass, like with Saddam. So I do think they prefer democracies as they consider them more stable and predictable.
so why us is ally with Israel and Saudi Arabia?
Israel is not in same league as Saudi Arabia on that autocracy scale, Israel is democracy but is a heard state, and monarchy by definition is absolutist form of government.@@888YangJi
@@ravibasera1 Israel an apartheid state with widespread human rights abuse and a national policy for ethnic cleansing. Those Israeli citizens whom are against Netanyahu and his cronies had left the country in despair. Hardly a liberal democracy in my book. If you believe it is, you are just in denial of reality.
People should have listened to guys like Mearsheimer 2+ years and 600k+ Ukrainian lives ago.
wait until you hear about iraq
And what was his prescriptions 2+ years ago? For Ukraine to give up/surrender?
You mean 32k Ukrainian lives* The Ukrainian agencies said that and they are the good side so it must be true..
@@JohnDorian-j7x Did you listen to this interview? Agree to be a neutral state. Don’t join NATO
Cool story bro xD like the russians would freaking care.
Freddie still believes the headlines in the western media as John looks on in disbelief, great stuff.
I wasn't sure if this was "playing devils advocate" or if he really believed it!
Not Freddie's fault. English Whitehall echochamber is so far far far from reality
He's steelmanning. Pretty obvious.
@@seannicholson8530 alt-right people are fundamentally stuck with the same conservative ideology as their mainstream brethren.
Piers Morgan Light!
Mearsheimer is very interesting. Thank you for having him on and thank you for asking good questions. I would love to listen to you have a discussion with him about the US election after it is over!
The problem is . . . Taiwan is recognized as a part of China by the international community. The US has no legal basis on which to intervene in a China-Taiwan war. So, sending US troops to defend Taiwan is essentially a "liberal war."
The USA State Department website acknowledges the One China policy but they are dishonest and untrustworthy so do what they do. A Rogue State.
No worry. America will never ever win a war to fight China. Remember the Korea war? China was so weak so poor so undeveloped and millions of its people died hunger at that time but still managed to win the war against American. Now China is a superpower. In the future there won't be a war between China and the U. S. simply because America has no courage to fight China. America has lost many wars even fighting very small, weak, and very poor nations. Like it or not it Is a fact.goodbye uncle Sam.
Taiwan is recognised as part of China by the Taiwan government itself.
And that is why US wont help them.
It's hilarious, it's basically *exactly* the mirror image of the situation in Ukraine - with the US taking *exactly* the same stance here, which they criticised Russia for with respect to Ukraine. In fact, the only substantial difference is that, rather than being on the US' doorstep (as Crimea/the Donbas/Luhansk are, with respect to Russia), Taiwan is practically on the other side of the World from Washington DC, completely undermining any similar mitigating arguments the US could make, such as threats to national security, or protection of culturally/ethnically similar people.
It absolutely baffles the mind how people can manage the mental gymnastics necessary to support the US stance with respect to Ukraine, whilst simultaneously criticising China when it comes to Taiwan.
How can the US seek to "control" China and not have China react negatively??
A great interview. If only mainstream media were to run interviews like this - that way more of the public would be better informed, less the victim of government propaganda, and better able to think more critically about really important issues on foreign policy.
Freddie is emotionally on Israel's side which wouldn't be wrong if he expressed it openly. He became almost confrontational with Mearsheimer when the professor laid out the facts regarding Israel's genocidal policy and military constraints.
Just like everyone else
If Freddie did otherwise all sponsors and advertisers would leave. And we all know why but we just aren't allowed to say why
Of course he is.
He is a genocidal person.
He knows how dangerous it is to be to critical, he is scared not emotionally attached to Israel
It's not about military dominance; it's about the population market. The US needs to figure out how to make at least 500 million people buy their expensive products. China has surpassed US technology with their cheaper and more advanced technology. I'm not sure how the US will persuade Asians to buy US expensive products instead of the cheaper and advanced Chinese alternatives.
It’s a great tragedy that the majority of the British political media class share Freddy’s mind set.
I do admire the fact that he at least appears to concede to mearshimers intellectual superiority.
Lol. Johann von der Mearsheimer superiority in what exactly? He is good in reminding us that we humans are driven primarily by selfish interests for power and domination. NOthing new. Its good that liberals are reminded of that, but nothin new.
His obsequiousness is admirable?
@@Tom-kt8lu I was being charitable but fair point 👍
It is because Freddie is too close to the English establishment. Their view is delusional, but it radiates out and distorts others' sense of normality.
What a wonderful interview! Freddy did an amazing job, even when disagreeing with Mearsheimer. Awesome!
Please invite Professor Jeffrey Sachs onto your programme.
Thank you
...if political candidates openly debated foreign & economic policy in such a deep & nuanced manner...
As ever, after listening to John Mearsheimer, one is enlightened and melancholy, often in equal measures. And, I, for one, learn so much about how to present one's views in a humane, polite, yet thoroughly analytical manner. Thanks to both of you for presenting this interview. And the big take-away: the world is in a mess, yet we can derive contentment and fulfillment from our small, everyday interactions with family, friends, neighbors, colleagues. And, who knows, perhaps this courteous, civil and respectful way of discussion will filter up to our leaders. (Well, I am not holding my breath!)
During many decades nobody interviewed Mearsheimer. Then he found the podcasts and he is being interviewed too often. Still Freddie asks very good questions by pushing the guest. I wish Freddie would have framed his questions even better:
* "Given that Israel wants the land and wants to get rid of the Palestinians, is Israel's strategy rational?" or "Is there any Israeli objective that would make the Israeli action rational?"
* "How much would Europe-Russia relationships influence Putin's willingness to negotiate. If the NordStream came back online and the Russian central bank money were returned, would that influence the negotiated outcome materially?"
As for the second question - I think you just need to listen why Putin says. In most cases he does exactly what he says. so he is quite honest. There is one main reason why new territory (excluding Crimea) is important for him now :
1) people who live currently there (e.g. in Mariupol) maybe will be killed or smth like that because they are "collaborants" if those territories go back to Ukraine. It's what Ukraninian officials really said.
2) As for Cimea - in addition to the previous argument, majority of people are Russians and also Russian fleet is there in Sevastopol.
But again, general concern for Russia was and is Ukraninan neutrality/not joining NATO. You can find an interview of David Arakhmia who was (not sure maybe still is) the leader of Zelenskiy's party fraction in Rada (parliament) participated in negotiations with Russia in Istanbul in April 2022. He told that that was the neutrality was the main point for Russians, they were OK to move back to pre-24 Feb 2022 border.
Nato? I don't think so... The West is obsessed with Crimea ( for realistic reasons 😊)... it's not the first time it tried a takeover of that strategic peninsula. This time, it used benighted ukraine and sacrificed it,the previous time it was the decaying Ottoman empire and sacrificed that one - no remorse on either count 😊
Everything Mr Mearsheimer said seems pretty obvious to me
No need to spend years studying IR if you are that brilliant.
It's obvious because it's true.
Greater Israel, as the IDF insignia clearly illustrates, is not only Gaza and the West Bank but also includes parts of all the surrounding countries, ie Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Iran, Jordan etc, etc, so they have made it very clear that their actions are nor defensive in nature. The IDF should change its acronym to the IAF.
There is no picture of Israel on the IDF insignia. It looks like a sword and an olive branch.
@@Tom-kt8lu The IDF in Gaza are wearing an insignia that shows a map of greater Israel, which includes all the countries I mentioned, there many examples online.
@ how do I find one?
@@Tom-kt8lu Really? You only have to google 'Greater Israel Insignia' and it pops up everywhere!
If Israel wants to conquer everybody, then why did they give Sinai back to Egypt? Stop spreading misinfo.
I wish Western Politicians would listen to John.
He mentioned he was basically blacklisted from consulting in Washington after publishing the Israel lobby
What about Eastern politicians?
Always extremely stimulating listening to Professor Mearsheimer. Thanks Freddie, from Cody, Wyoming.
In 1999, I was flying empty 767 and 747 freighters to Hong Kong and flying them at max gross weight to Anchorage and Louisville. I mentioned to some people that we consumers in west were funding China’s military growth that would threaten us. They looked at me like I had 2 heads.
I don’t believe the US will be successful in containing PRC.
We need to be careful not to end in nuclear war.
The Chinese have figured out what they need to do. Mearsheimer isn’t bringing new ideas. They read Sun Tzu and Machiavelli .
Professor Mearsheimer face when he hears his host repeat propaganda 😂
Both of them were right
Wow that is one of the best interviewers I've ever heard. Liked, subscribed and going through the back catalog now...
It's hard to listen to Mearsheimer and come to any other conclusion than we're basically doomed.
I think he's a bit of a sadomasochist. He seems to relish the prospect that we're all doomed. Does he not realise that we can avoid the inevitable consequences of realism, where it's "the state uber alles", by simply abolishing the states system.
If you have 2 functioning eyeballs in your head you should have reached that conclusion ages ago all by yourself! And like he said, he didn't even touch on domestic politics yet! 😂😂
We are doomed to have conflict and tensions. It doesn't mean that we are 'doomed' in the conventional sense of the word.
Exponentially harder if you have John speaking on geopolitics and Chris Hedges on domestic policies and failures. Just almost nihilistic, but I wouldn't want anything less than the turth.
If "doomed" means the west failed to "liberate" the world and now the world is waking up, then yeah, you are doomed
As a realist I am of the opinion that it's not humanly or realistic for 4% of the world population to dominate the rest of the world population.
It's therefore, more realistic to pursue a policy of peaceful cooperation and co-existence amount all countries on earth and thus occur the moral high ground? Or being on the right side of history?
Humans are very self centered and self serving when mentally manipulated. The human condition is the root cause of almost all societal atrocities.
Mearsheimers point of view is spot on every single topic I look at, he’s probably the one of the few ppl on the internet I could agree with on all topics, basically all he does is lay out the facts n keeps it real no bias at all.
Thanks!
I want to thank Freddy for the great interaction and for not giving John an easy time, which forces John to explain himself better, leading to more understanding of how John is thinking, when compared to many other interviews.
I want to thank John for keeping his calm and explaining hist position patiently and carefully, and makings sense. His analytical view does not mix up understanding and agreement, which is refreshing.
I think that John very much enjoys debating his analysis and relishes every opportunity to delve down deeper into his argument.
28:57 "The US goverment will go to great lengths to manipulate the discourse on what is going on in ways that represent China as a mortal threat and therefore give the american puplic powerful incentives to support the war ...to include participating in the fighting". People should become immune to fear-mongering by the authorities and the fearmongers should be silenced immediately 🙂. As long as people fear and see enemies, we live in a lie. Humanity should step to the next level. How would that happen?
uh, millions of Americans and Europeans regularly support China as the #1 manufacturing power in the world.
He's forgetting that the MSM, as an extension of the US government, has lost a lot of trust and viewership and has little impact on what ppl believe.
Respect to UnHerd for hosting this guy given their pro Israel stance. Don't see that very often.
Good questions, honest answers. Very good interview
As usual, Pr. JM is clear and brilliant. Facts are facts. Nothing else
Excellent questions and one of the best episodes so far. Weell done! Thanks to both of the participants!!!! Thank you for such a high level of interaction, and all of that on good old YT!!!! Looking forward to a post US elections episode. Thanks
Outstanding program...thank you both...
The (USA) America call it "Liberation" instead of "Invasion". That was what US call it in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the list goes on...
Instances of the United States "liberated", overthrowing or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government)
China 1949 to early 1960s
Albania 1949-53
East Germany 1950s
Iran 1953 *
Guatemala 1954 *
Costa Rica mid-1950s
Syria 1956-7
Egypt 1957
Indonesia 1957-8
British Guiana 1953-64 *
Iraq 1963 *
North Vietnam 1945-73
Cambodia 1955-70 *
Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 *
Ecuador 1960-63 *
Congo 1960 *
France 1965
Brazil 1962-64 *
Dominican Republic 1963 *
Cuba 1959 to present
Bolivia 1964 *
Indonesia 1965 *
Ghana 1966 *
Chile 1964-73 *
Greece 1967 *
Costa Rica 1970-71
Bolivia 1971 *
Australia 1973-75 *
Angola 1975, 1980s
Zaire 1975
Portugal 1974-76 *
Jamaica 1976-80 *
Seychelles 1979-81
Chad 1981-82 *
Grenada 1983 *
South Yemen 1982-84
Suriname 1982-84
Fiji 1987 *
Libya 1980s
Nicaragua 1981-90 *
Panama 1989 *
Bulgaria 1990 *
Albania 1991 *
Iraq 1991
Afghanistan 1980s *
Somalia 1993
Yugoslavia 1999-2000 *
Ecuador 2000 *
Afghanistan 2001 *
Venezuela 2002 *
Iraq 2003 *
Haiti 2004 *
Somalia 2007 to present
Honduras 2009 *
Libya 2011 *
Syria 2012
Ukraine 2014 *
Venezuela 2019
Pakistan 2022 *
Haiti 2022 *
Bravo. And thank you. Eyes must be opened
Incomplete list.
For example - where is Venezuela during Trump's first term?
@ Pretty sure it failed since Madura is still in power. Wasn't it Obama who tried to install Juan Guaido?
@themissingpeace7956 no, Bolton under DT - yes it failed, but your original comment & list includes "attempts" as well ;-)
@@tk80mufa5 True
UNCENSORED FACTS
Always a breath of fresh air listening to Mearsheimer.
Conspiracy is always on board, too.
Good interview. Much thanks to Sayers.
I am quite imperessed with the quality of the questions.
I fully appreciate his logic and reason, even if I don't like it, I think he's right. I just wish for a different kind of world!
The thing that bothers me about the amoral stance towards the world is where the hell does this end up taking us as a species? We're just locked into whatever game theoretically optimal strategy is of the moment, and we just roll with the ugliness as it unfolds.
If I may give my humble view on this maybe it will resonate with you... More than one perspective can be true simultaneously. The realist amoral perspective is looking at things from the outside in. Real change has to come from the inside and travel out. The realist worldview explains the world we're living in from a valid perspective. But positive change that can start within you and I have the potential to spread and travel outwards through inspiration and love. World leaders may act according to realist principles but they are also capable of acting from a place of human decency and love. Trust is a powerful thing that ultimately benefits all of humanity. The two perspectives are not necessarily contradictory even if it seems like that sometimes.
@@Poppillon We're in overshoot in a whole bunch of areas of sustainability, we're going to run out of oil in the next 100 years, and we've having a lot of difficulty transitioning to whatever is supposed to replace that. If we keep doing whatever we're doing we will be cooking ourselves as we scramble over the last reserves, and dealing with a massive contraction of this current world as food production becomes increasingly difficult and nations/ local geographical alliances start becoming isolationist. We're building AI that is most likely going to lead to a winner-takes-all scenario, while risking terminal race conditions in which AI will optimize under large scale militaristic conflicts, and everyone is incentivized to push on with this insane paradigm with most people being totally oblivious about the main drivers of the world and the boarder implications of their everyday actions. People are also just living in a magical fantasy version of reality because of how uncomfortable challenging their assumptions and culturally inherited perspective is.
"Positive change starts with you" isn't a remedy to the tragedy, as far as I can tell. It essentially doesn't matter what any individual does within a system so overdetermined towards competitive outcomes unless they are somehow able to catalyze a shift away from that. I think that unless we have a serious intentional push together in a direction informed by our ideals, but not bound to magical thinking, we will be chewed up by horror towards the end of this century. I grant that future predicting is a hopeless game, but when I look at the seriousness of what we will have to contend with, and the way we are behaving - I wonder what is even the smallest glimmer of hope when this unfolds over the next 70 years.
The realist view is a clearer view of the world than most out there, but I don't think it follows up on what the implications of that are as we are forced to deal with an end to fossil fuels, and the negative externalities of a species acting as it is on a global scale. Many things are true simultaneously, but reality is the ultimate arbiter of the consequences of our actions. If we're not sufficiently mapping the landscape that we're plotting a trajectory on, both as individuals and as groups, then we will hit a wall that we did not foresee as we run faster and faster through the mess we're making for ourselves.
@@riffking2651 we have never been clever enough to predict the future. Fixing the world by pursuing an ideology, sometimes even a very positive one, has been tried many times with catastrophic consequences.
You cannot live your life focusing on a problem without becoming a part of the problem. Sure, a person can make a difference, even a great difference, but always by focusing on a positive vision, never by focusing on the problem. If you don't have a positive vision you will become part of the problem. Better to focus on the things you can fix, large or small, and do it with an attitude of positivity. That will be enough. The world is inhabited by individuals. Individual growth is inspiring. Inspirational people inspire other people around them. We lift others by growing ourselves. That is where real change begin
Human beings don't think of "we" in terms of the human species, and neither do they act "as a species". "We" means my family, my tribe, my nation or the fellow-followers of my religion. In my view, any expectation of a "species-wide" agreed course of action is doomed to disappointment.
@@riffking2651right on AI. Wrong on oil.
I heard more truths expressed by this intelligent, thoughtful man, than from most of today’s so called leaders. The world would be a far safer, saner place if more people like this man were listened to and heeded. Thank you for interviewing him. Enjoyed this
At some point one realises that FS just doesn't want to believe JM's take on Israel being driven, rather than driving. A couple of feeble attempts to counter....but then Realism wins! I just love JM's way of thinking and getting his points across, without ever being rude or condescending. A truly great mind and man.
@1:00:55 refreshing to hear Mearsheimer’s realism about Trump, as opposed to all the dumb Trump fanatics who continue to deny his neocon-Zionist and deep state policies.
I have utmost respect for professor Mearshiemer. He’s amazing in Judging Freedom podcast, as is Dr Sachs, Max Blumenthal, Alastair Crooke, etc.
Wonderful interview, I’ve been waiting for someone to debate with JM like that for longtime.
The irony is that we are here today and the situation is depressing like the professor says precisely because of one country trying to dominate the world. This is what happens. People will not over the long term go along with that. Stop trying to dominate and get along and things might change.
2:59 Mearshimer is right from one perspective, the Anglo American one. However his understanding of China and applying Anglo American Hegemony logic on Asia is a puzzle piece that don't fit. He should prove by logic and inference how Hegemonic Imperialism fit onto China because he still never managed to do it. Jeffrey Sachs knows this very well and they talk about it but Mearshimer still don't understand Chinese logic.
Mearsheimer is one of the more astute political commentators of our time. A philosopher-king amid clowns.
No he lives in an intellectual ivory tower!
@@jzNottobee Except that things he says explain the vast majority of everything that has been going on and where it is heading. He has a terrific track record. A pretty good ivory tower.
@@libertarianbydefault Explaining stuff, as long as it doesn't has to be the right explanation, is not that hard.
The opposite to "realism" is "fiction," also "delusion."
there is also "wishful thinking".
You are messing up definitions. The opposite of Realism is Liberalism. They are policies, not realities; both are delusional, as it is delusion that motivates nations to fight.
What? Which Western countries try to be as powerful as possible…just one.
@Kefuddle Los Estados Unidos spends 13.3% of its GDP on defense (the data for 2023). It spends more on defense than the next eleven largest military spenders in the world put together.
It's mostly money very poorly spent.
15:40 The overall idea of Offensive Realism is: a powerful country must dominate and become hegemon. But according to China history, I can tell you that's not true. You need to understand what are 王道 (the Way of the King) Vs 霸道 (the Way of the Hegemon) in Confucianism ideas before you predict the way of China will do. There has the other way to behave as a globe great power. In fact, China was rise peacefully in last 40 years and was achieved remarkable economic success. There is no reason that China to launch a war to destroy her own successful way.
27:33 No, it won’t. The United States will not fight to die to defense Taiwan because Taiwan is not their core interest. The core interests of the United States are the core interests of the Israel Lobby, Middle East are their core interest. But for the Chinese, unification of China is a common goal for every Chinese in Mainland China. You should know very well about that Dr. Mearsheimer.
47:02 if the Two-State solution doesn’t work, try One Country Two Systems solution.
i really like the way this guy do interviews and also who he did it with.
Top of the line, in the world scale.
Top notch and high intellect quality.
You can differ with John.. but u will always respect him🖐
It's not even that i agree philosophically with Mearsheimer, what's refreshing is that he tells the truth and doesnt treat his audience with contempt
I guess this presenter didn't know about how effective the Iron Dome is in Israel lately to say what he did.
I was confused about Iron Dome too. It seems to have been very effective but it's true that if challenged for long enough it would run out kof ammunition. I think there is a laser based system that would be cheaper to run but I don't know if would deal with large missiles. Then there are rail guns ...
@@zotriczaoh7098 Not quite, as Professor John Mearsheimer said some got through, and U.S knows which is why they gave them the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system. Iran has some advanced missiles of their own, it would be better for Israel to resolve the situation for the Palestinians than escalate this further.
@@SlayerEddyTV We probably need not argue the point but I had the impression that M said the it was ineffective. Thanks for the further info.
@@zotriczaoh7098It is ineffective. In April Iran succesfully over satured it with drones and got through, even though the Jordanians, the USA, the Brits and France supported in air.
In October there is plenty of footage showing that Most missiles got through. 50% at least, more like 70+%.
Its a great system against self build Humus rockets or from older rockets hizbollah used in the past.
Air defence system in every Western country, including ISR isnt great.
Thats easily explained by the simple fact that these companies couldnt make profit in that area so they dont research and produce.
Iran has hypersonics, the iron dome can only deal with ballistic trajecrories. They got through in large numbers. The military censor stopped the info getting out
. @@zotriczaoh7098
These greatness of states cost too much for ordinary people
49:45 interesting: the interviewer is changing the subject because he cannot accept that his worldview is based on promulgated myths.
someone needs to ask mearsheimer, can realist states realise that constant escalation to stay on top or contain is likely to lead to only constant war, so under realism, can great powers ever enter peaceful co-operative co-existence.
Never. Thats why his book is called TRAGEDY of Great Power Politics.
The tragedy of great power poltiics
I think you’ve answered your own question, relative peace only occurs when one state has overwhelming power, and in that case we will still see abuse of power by the controlling state. So, in that case I don’t think there will ever be full cooperative true power sharing worldwide peace.
@@georgegirraffe9900 i hear what you are saying, but my question is to go beyond this. we know under the realist model, they can't stop. BUT can they stop if they reflect on the realist model and where it is taking them? i feel that sort of reflection, WHEN presented with your own actions (all parties involved have to share this reflection via UN negotiations for example), should they not be able to stop? I'd really like Mearsheimer to answer that.
i repeat, i understand under the realist model they can't and should not stop, but the fact that Mearsheimer (and realists like him) are here spelling this out to all these 'great powers', this should be like breaking the 4th wall for them, making them LOOK at themselves? Thus under this consideration it makes sense to me that an evolution can take place, moving away from the realist reactionary nature? i do believe in a version of free will which can take place under the circumstances of receiving enough information. most times we are slaves to our nature, but with enough information, free will of a sort can be exerted. Mearsheimer is here to provide that insight to them. surely the great powers could change their natures with this information?
He's obsessed with the term "ruthless." Conflates it repeatedly with strength. Not buying what he's selling.
Excellent conversation.
Excellent interview. Greetings from Brazil.
So, this inevitably leads to a Hobbesian Leviathan style dictatorship and, in its final expression, a global dictatorship. Isn't that the case ? After all, regional domination must lead to total domination and that is quite the terrifying thought. The 'might is right' philosophy can only lead to misery for most people I think. We need cooperation and mutual understanding of potential consequences of such philosophies like these and we do that via discourse and study of such matters. And that doesn't mean a small bunch of idiots controlling us.
Super interview 👍
A very interesting talk, amazing how professor is so sharp and agile at such age❤❤❤
Biden would have been asleep all the time. John tells people how the world really is, and avoids blowing smoke up their ass or conveniently overlooking the historic aspects which led us to today's pretty pass. In sabotaging Germany and the EU, the US really damaged itself more lastingly than they yet realise.
Except at one point near the end where he makes a Biden-like name switch of Ukraine for Russia.
@@rastrats Come on, we all do that !
Pr. Mearsheimer as excellent as ever. One of the sharpest intellects on international relations in the world.
If Dr. Mearsheimer was working at my university I would definitely change majors. What an excellent mind. I have a new political speaker with a clear, realistic approach to laying out facts that I highly appreciate and will listen to with pleasure from now on.
58:46 “I think that the decision that was made in April 2008 to bring Ukraine into NATO, which precipitated this crisis and this war, was one the most catastrophic decisions made in modern history by a great power.” - brilliant!
Thanks to you indeed Freddie, for a having such a civilised conversation!
Morally reprehensivle. Great phrase by John Mearsheimer describing Israel's genocide of Palestinians.
John is doing a great job in trying to educate this fellow, but it seems that not only history's lessons but his wisdom is falling on deaf ears.
I enjoyed the conversation.
The interviewer did a great job here. I thought he teased some contradiction from Mearsheimer early. Far more interesting to listen to John speak in this setting than when he appears on “far left” channels.
I would really like to know if, during his recent stay in China, he really told them that he finds it very desirable that the United States defend Taiwan at all costs. I don't think so!
He’s walking contradiction of his own theory of “great power”on China or Israel. How it can be?😂😂😂😂😂
I was trying to figure this out too. But i think this is an academic theory and what he says is applied to the audience. I don't think these are personal beliefs or contradictions as so much a defence of the Realist principles.
@@lyndsa158Exactly 💯
There are environments in which people do not have an allergic reaction to hearing ideas contrary to their own.
He has been saying that for years.
"To have an American give a non-friendly nation advice on how to culturally compete with Americans, won't that make many Americans feel uncomfortable?"
That is such a British assumption 😂
Thank you Freddy and UnHerd, for one of the best Mearsheimer outputs I have seen lately.
This was although very Bleak …very pleasurable to listen to.
John's facial expression when Freddie is trying to make the argument that Israel has been successful is priceless. He's like how deluded can you be to even ask such question.
I enjoy so much how the profesor say what it is not taking a political side, i am now a huge fan of realism 🥰🤓
Freddie is inside Hasbara thought which is messianic. Mearsheimer’s realist theory concerns great powers in the world system. Israel is not a great power, so Freddie’s questions on this subject are almost always beside the point.
John describes neo-colonialism perfectly - only the system in the west.
"Maybe if we just call everything we don't like 'colonialism,' regardless of how much like colonialism it is, people will be tricked into assuming it's equivalent somehow."
@@twelvecatsinatrenchcoat he supports it though, he just wants it directed elsewhere
@@billusher2265 I don't care if he supports, I care what words we use to describe things to try and make associations in people's minds. People are just grabbing whatever "bad" words they can find and sticking them to everything they don't like.
@@twelvecatsinatrenchcoat yeah, like calling Russia colonialist and its non-Russian territories as colonies, though Russia never was colinail, but a;ways a classic land empire, where a;; part are constituent part of the country, and all residents have the same ctitizenship, not like in colonies without any rights
@@twelvecatsinatrenchcoatenlighten us with the proper definition of colonialism and/or neo-colonialism.
It's good to finally see Freddy showing some respect for John Mearsheimer. This is the 3rd interview I have watched and in the 2nd one, Freddy was very rude, curt, even sarcastic, undermining this accomplished intellectual, asking really loaded and unanswerable questions. He seemed inpatient and frustrated. John of course handled him professionally and respectfully. I actually switched it off halfway through. Here Freddy's penny has clearly dropped and he's asking fantastic questions that I/we want asked like...'Do you say that in China?' Haha good stuff!
Excellent! Thank you Freddy and prof. Maersheimer for your brilliant content!
The notion that, during the "unipolar moment", the US was all about liberal values, idealism and spreading democracy is trash. Rampant pursuit of economic and military hegemony is not "liberalism", and John Mearsheimer knows this.
Watching this discussion while high was a mistake.
I don't know, I got through it all right. :-) Then again, I'm an international relations realist nerd.
Mearsheimer is so wrong when he talks about China. He says he’s not worried about who wins a war with China because that’s far off. I don’t know why he doesn’t get this but if the US and China ever go to war it will end in a nuclear exchange just like it would with the US and Russia.
He also says that realism is based on the idea that a country’s survival should be the most important consideration in any situation. Ok, that makes sense BUT going to war with China over Taiwan threatens our survival. When it comes to China he cares more about US DOMINANCE than he does about our survival as a nation. He is a walking contradiction.
He is correct when he talks about Russia and the Middle East. When he talks about China he is a nationalist neocon. That is my REALIST view of this man.
or you're just a layman and dont know
@@noahlenten8360 Phillip713 is professor of fuck all at the university of his moms basement.
Phillip doesn't understand the difference between what JM thinks his theory predicts, and what he would LIKE to happen - in an idealist pacifist fairy tale utopia world.
He even says in the video that he quote "hopes it doesn't come to that" ( US - China conflict over Taiwan )
On the Taiwan question, John should explicitly put out the same warning that he did regarding the expansion of NATO posing an existential threat for Russia and Putin as applied to the US's increased military support of Taiwan, Japan and S. Korea in posing an existential for China and Xi. Containment might be an accurate realist strategy for state hegemony purposes, but the benefit of maintaining neutral buffer states to avoid hot and wasteful wars might equally be a cogent strategy for maintaining the peace and avoiding nuclear escalation. John's realist theories must leave room for pro-actively avoiding the potential destruction of humanity.
Simply amazingly clear.
This host say “misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan” @10:23. Is he CRAZY. MISADVENTURES??? Thousands of innocent civilians in those countries died by the hands of the West who had no business being there never mind the American troops who gave their life for these “misadventures”
But here is the problem with the theme that US invasion of Iraq was for liberal reasons; why not invade Cuba and liberate Cuban people instead of Iraq? I guess because there is no oil in Cuba!! So even during the unipolar moment, the adventures were still based on purely vital interests considerations, of course with the facade of liberal values!!
Excellent point. They are no liberals - they're colonists bent on exploiting resources.
The Material Conditions strike again.
UnHerd - Please invite this scholar on more!!!
Yes, I'd be very interested in his take on domestic politics of western countries, brics, Sahel, so many things. I like his uncluttered, amoral take.
Great discussion. Please have a discussion about European politics since they seem like the ultimate looser in the coming reconfiguration of global politics.