This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #422 with Mark Cuban.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
You’ve started many businesses, invested in many businesses, heard a lot of pitches privately and on Shark Tank. So you’re the perfect person to ask what makes a great entrepreneur?
But he was also very insistent that… He worked at a company called Regency Products where they did upholstery on cars, and he would bring me there to sweep the floors, not because he wanted me to learn that business, because he wanted me to learn how backbreaking that work was. He lost an eye in an accident at work, a staple broke, and the only thing he wanted for my brothers and I was for us to never have to work like that, to go to college to figure it out.
And that’s not easy for 99% of the people. Some people look at that as an opportunity and get excited about it. Some people get terrified because it’s, okay, maybe I’m comfortable, maybe I have responsibilities. And so whatever your circumstances are, if you want to take that next step, you have to be able to deal with the consequences of changing your circumstances. And that’s the first thing. Do you save money? If you have a job, but d’you have a mortgage? Do you have a family? You’ve got to save money. You can’t just walk. They’ve got to eat and they’ve got to have shelter. But on the other side of the coin, if you’ve got nothing, it’s the perfect time to start a business.
So we started this company called AudioNet, and effectively became the first streaming content company on the internet. And we’re like, okay, we’re not sure how we’re going to make this work, but we were able to make it work when we started going to radio stations and TV stations and music labels and everything and evolved. Audionet.com, Which was only audio at the beginning, to broadcast.com in 1998, which was audio and video, and became the largest multimedia site on the internet. Took it public in July of 1998. It had the largest first day jump in the history of the stock market at the time. And then a year later we sold it to Yahoo for $5.7 billion in Yahoo stock, and I owned right around 30% of the company, give or take. And so after taxes, that’s what got me there.
It’s got Dallas sports and Dallas News and politics, and if you’re in an office or you’re outside of Dallas, connect to audionet.com and now you can listen to these things on demand. And that’s how we started. And it started with one radio station, and then it was five, then it was 10, then it was video content, then the laws were different then. So we could literally go out and buy CDs and host them and just let people listen to whatever music. And we went from 10 users a day to a hundred to a thousand, to hundreds of thousands to a million over those next four years.
There was no cloud back then. And just pulling together all those pieces to make it work. But where we really made our money was by taking that network that we had built and then going to corporations and saying, look, it’s 1996, ’97, ’98. And to communicate with your worldwide employees, what they would do is they would go to an auditorium that had a satellite uplink, and then they would have people go to theaters or ballrooms and hotels that had satellite down links and they would broadcast the product introductions, whatever. And so we said to them, look, you’re paying millions of dollars to reach all your employees when you can do it. Pay us a half a million dollars, and we’ll do it just on their PCs at work. So we did. When Intel announced the P 90 PC, we charged them $2 million or whatever to do that.
When Motorola announced a new phone or a new product, we would charge them. And so we used a consumer side to do a proof of concept for the network, and then we would take that knowledge and go to corporations, and that’s how we made our revenue.
Yahoo, when we went public in ’98 or right before, I think it was, they made an investment of $2 million, which gave us a connection to them. After we went public, they decided they needed to have multimedia, so in April of ’99, we made a deal, and then July of 2000 is when it closed.
Anyway, these Wall Street bankers or analysts rather, that were the big analysts of the time would call me up because they would ask my broker, “What does he know about this product, this product?” I knew them all, what was working and not working. The ones that worked, I say that it’s working and they say something, the stock would go up $20. My broker was like, “You know this better than they do. You need to invest.”
I started buying and selling stocks, and this was in 1990 and was just killing it. I was making 80, 90, 100% a year over those next four years to the point where guy came in and asked to use my trading history to start a hedge fund, which we did. I sold within nine months, it was great. The point being as it goes forward, so when we sold to Yahoo, I already had a lot of experience trading stocks, and I had seen different bubbles come and go. The bubble for PC manufacturers, a bubble for networking manufacturers, they went up, up, up, up, up, and then they came straight down after the hype where somebody just leapfrogged.
When we sold to Yahoo, I was like I’ve got a B next to my name. That’s all I need, or all I want. I don’t want to be greedy. I’d seen this story before where stocks get really frothy and go straight down. I knew that because all of what I had was in stock, I needed to find a way to collar it and protect it. Understanding stocks and trading and options and all that, my broker and I, we went and shorted an index that had Yahoo in it.
The law at the time was you couldn’t short any indexes that had more than 5% of that stock in it, of the Yahoo stock. I took pretty much $20 million dollars, everything I had at the time, and I shorted the index.
What was even more interesting out of that period, my broker at that time was at Goldman Sachs, and I had asked him to see if there was a way to trade the VIX, the volatility index, and there wasn’t. One of the people that Goldman that we were working with to try to create this actually left Goldman and created indexes that allowed you to trade the VIX.
There were people creating companies with just a website and going public. That’s a bubble where there’s no intrinsic value at all. People aren’t even trying to make operating cap profits, they’re just trying to leverage the frothiness of the stock market, that’s a bubble. You don’t see that right now. You don’t see any IPOs right now for that matter, so I don’t think we’re in a bubble now, but back then, yes, I thought we were in a bubble, but that wasn’t really the motivating factor.
That said, there’s some examples of people that you’re like, they seem to have gotten lucky a lot. We’ll mention Jeff Bezos. It seems like he did a lot of really interesting, powerful decisions for many years with Amazon to make it successful.
Even Facebook in 2004, the bubble had burst and the price for computers had fallen enough. And kids in school all needed computers or laptops. If he had tried to do something like that five years earlier… He was too young, but five years earlier or five years later, or Friendster might’ve been the ultimate or MySpace,
It’s funny because back then, that was 2006, I was an investor at Box.net with Aaron Levy and… Oh, there was one other company, but there were three of them where there’d be emails where I’d introduce them and we’d all talk in these emails and they’d all gone to have astronomical success.
Red Swoosh had its issues. I always look at peer-to-peer as stealing bandwidth from the internet providers when bandwidth was a scarce commodity. What Travis did with that though, was great. He convinced gaming companies who wanted to do downloads of the clients for those games to use his peer-to-peer on Red Swoosh. He busted his ass, and I think he sold it for $18 million, so he did well.
So it was natural for him to come to me, and I still have the emails and ask me about Uber Cab. I thought okay, this is a great idea. I really, really like it. He showed me his budgets, and I think they were raising money at $10 million or $15 million or whatever. I’m like, “Your biggest challenge is going to be you’re going to have to fight all the incumbent taxi commissions. They’re going to want to put you out of business. That’s going to be a challenge and I think you don’t have enough money designated for marketing to get all that done.” I said, “I’d invest, but not quite at that valuation.” Never came back to me.
I made the decision to go out there and hire 15 different development coaches, one for each player. Everybody thought I was just insane, but it sent the message that we were going to do whatever it took to win. Once the guys believed that winning was the goal as opposed to just making money, attitudes change, efforts went up, and the rest is history.
When you think about sporting events that you’ve been to, you don’t remember the score, you don’t remember the home runs or the dunks, you remember who you were with, and you remember why you went. It was my first date with a girl who’s now my wife or I went with my buddies and he threw up on the person in front of us. My dad took me, my aunt, my uncle took me. Those are the experiences you remember.
Once I conveyed to our people that this is what we were selling, that what happened in the arena off the court was just as important as what happened on the court, if not more so because if mom or dad are bringing the 10-year-old, you have to keep them occupied because they have short attention spans.
I would get into fights with NBA, put aside the refs, but getting in fights in the NBA, I would say NBA, nothing but attorneys, because they had no marketing skills whatsoever. To their credit, they realized that was a problem and started bringing in better and better marketing people.
If it turns out to be a close game, and that ball’s in the air, and if it goes in, everybody’s hugging and high-fiving people you’ve never seen before in your life, and if it misses, you’re commiserating with people you’ve never seen. That’s such a unique experience that’s unique to sports. We never sold that and that’s exactly what we started.
When we start talking about DEI and it’s just de facto racist and this stuff, stuff that I just think is nonsense. I have no problem sharing my opinion. If he disagrees, okay, he can disagree, I don’t care. It’s fun to engage, but he doesn’t really engage, he just comes back with snark comments, which is his choice.
The E in equity means when you hire somebody, you put them in a position to succeed. The I, inclusion, is when you’ve hired somebody and they may not be typical, if you will, you show them some love and give them the support they need so they can do their job as best they can and feel comfortable and confident going to work. It’s that simple.
Now, does that mean that there aren’t DEI programs that are implemented poorly? Of course not. Everything that’s implemented poorly in one company to another. Sales, marketing, human resources, you can pick any element of business and find companies that implement it poorly, but that’s the beauty of capitalism in a free market or mostly free market where if you make these choices and they are the wrong choices, you’re going to lose your best people. You’re not going to be able to hire the best people. You’re not going to execute on your business plans in the way that we discussed, regardless of the size of the company.
It also, I think, depends on where you’re having the discussion. When I’m in a different group of people off of X, the feedback’s completely different. To your question of reverse racism, yes, it happens because people are people. There’s no human being that is 100% objective. It’s also, there’s very, very, very few jobs that can be determined on a purely quantitative basis.
How do you tell one janitor from the other, who’s the best? How do you tell one salesperson that you’re hiring versus another you’re hiring because they haven’t sold your product yet, so you don’t know? We talked earlier about firing people because you made mistakes.
Yes, there’s discrimination against any group, white, Asian, black, green, orange, whatever it may be, but I truly believe that there’s far more discrimination against people of color than there are people who are white. I think it’s become a straw man, that reverse discrimination because of DEI is prevalent or near ubiquitous.
If I’m in a major company and I’m publicly criticizing or even internally criticizing a sales plan or a product, our product sucks. There was a Google engineer that got fired for saying Google had AGI, and nobody believed they did and they knew that created problems. It wasn’t DEI related, but it was saying something publicly that was, in the CEO’s eyes, to the detriment of the company.
I think those are all analogous. If you’re trying to accomplish something within an organization because you think there’s a problem and there’s people speaking out saying look, we’re getting it wrong, I think I’m a victim of all this, and the company… Then leadership has got to make a decision. Do they agree or not agree? Are they right or are they wrong? Is it positive or negative to the company? And you decide.
This conversation that conservatives are being silenced in organizations now, I haven’t seen it. The other side of your question, I think unpacking it, is what’s driving all this? Put aside universities for one. In corporate America, when I talk to people in corporate America about DEI, they always start talking about ideology.
I’ve talked to Bill Ackman, who you’ve had on, and when I asked him, “Bill, you run your own companies. Who’s telling you what to do?” “They are.” “Who’s they? “It’s the universities, the people who have this ideology of DEI.” I’m like, “Did they force you? Did they coerce you? Did you lose control of your company?” “No, it’s not me. It happens to other people.” Then I talk to other people, same thing.
I try not to go one-on-one in Twitter conversations on this topic. In the DMs, I’ll talk to people who are really conservative and I’ll ask the same question and be like, “Who’s forcing you to do this?” “It’s the ideology that’s everywhere. Didn’t see the Harvard thing in University of North Carolina.” I’m like I’ve never had anybody try to push me in this direction to do this. This was my business choice. I’m not trying to tell other people you have to do this. You make your own business choices. Where companies have made their business choices, and if somebody doesn’t feel confident or comfortable with it, they may feel they’re being discriminated against.
There was something I just read in the Wall Street Journal, where the Wall Street Journal had a company interview 2 million people, and the difficulty in firing and how people, when they were fired, 40% of the people who were fired felt like it was wrong, that they were doing a great job. Then it talked about the HR person going through the hassle of trying to explain to this person through performance reviews that they weren’t doing a good job, yet the people still thought they were doing a great job, despite being told they’re not doing a good job.
I see that as being an analogous to all this huffing and puffing about reverse discrimination and conservatives not being able to speak up because if 40% of people who have been fired don’t believe they should have been fired, there’s a disconnect somewhere in how you think you’re doing your job. If you just feel like, I can’t speak up because of it, because of you’re white, and that doesn’t comport well with DEI programs, a lot of things are going to happen.
Either that’s going to come up in your performance review, HR or your boss is going to have to address it in some way, it’s going to get to HR at some level, and then decisions are going to have to be made. You can’t just fire somebody because they spoke up. Somebody’s going to have to communicate with you. I think a lot of… I just don’t trust the supposed volume-
But that said, if you ask people in Russia, a lot of them will say, “There’s no propaganda here. There’s no censorship.” And all that kind of stuff. It’s sometimes hard to see when you’re in it that this stuff is happening. It does seem difficult to criticize DEI programs, not horribly difficult, terrible, they are this monster that infiltrates everything, but it is difficult and it requires great leadership.
I can see an argument for the ideology in a university. I can see, you look at the amount of money spent on it. And so while the goal is right, the way they implement it in universities, the way they implement most things in universities, is wrong. There’s a reason why tuition has gone up a multitude, or a multiple, of inflation. They’re not well run organizations across the board. So I’m not going to argue with that at all. So when you’ve seen me argue with DEI, I haven’t waded into DEI in universities at all.
And that seems, to me, to be counter to the whole Conservative movement right now, other than school boards where it’s centralized, and the Republican candidate is all about centralized power in him. And to me, that’s just a conflict in a lot of the underpinning of the whole DEI conversation, that a lot of which goes through Christopher Rufo right now.
So Elon tweeted, “The fundamental axiomatic flaw of the woke mind virus is that the weaker party’s always right (in even if they want you to die).”
And you responded, at length, but the beginning is, “The fundamental axiomatic flaw of the anti-woke mind is that it allows groups with historical power to play the victim by taking anecdotal examples and packaging them into conjured conspiratorial ideology that threatens to upend the power structures they have been depending on.”
Up until a month ago, maybe if you put in keto gummies, Shark Tank keto gummies, into Google, it would show up with scammy ads, scam ad, after scam. And I would get emails, up until a month ago, from elderly people asking me why the gummies weren’t working, and why the companies were charging all this money on a month-by-month basis when they tried to cancel. And they said it was the number one deal on Shark Tank of all time and all Shark… It was a mistake.
And Elon’s not allowed to make those same mistakes, but… Elon’s allowed to make those mistakes, but Google isn’t?
Now, I know that’s not direct to your point of internal influence to the output, but people on the outside are going to check for that now. It’s almost like the new bug contest to try to find bugs in software. And then on the inside, if it’s all left-leaning, and all you have is left-leaning employees, because most Conservatives won’t want to work there, then again that’s self-correcting as well.
Now maybe they’re built some on open source, maybe it’ll be copy-pasta where you can just cut and paste and create your own model and train it yourself. Maybe it’ll be mixture of experts where maybe it’ll be a Meta front end. Like we’re working on a project where we take 30 different AI models and there’s just a Meta search engine where it searches all of them, and you can compare all the outputs and see what you think is the best, like a search engine. Because you might get, “Is DEI good?” “Is the Covid vaccine good?” You’re going to get a variety of outputs and you have to make that decision yourself.
That’s what I think is going to happen with AI as well, because I think brands… There’s no way the Mayo Clinic and the Harvard Medical School are just going to contribute all their IP to ChatGPT, or Gemini, or whatever. It’s going to have to be licensed or they’re going to do their own.
I think America has been really good at having these two blue and red, always at tension with each other, dividing the populace, and in the process of doing that, figuring stuff out. Almost like playing devil’s advocate, but in real life.
And so going back to what you said earlier, people in Russia don’t think invading Ukraine… A lot of them see it as a positive. I’m sure you have relatives and friends who think it’s the best thing that ever happened, because they believe in Putin.
It’s not woke ideology, because I never felt any pressure to make the choices that I’ve chosen, including diversity, equity, and inclusion, and I’ve never forced anybody or told anybody to do it. I just said, “Here’s my experiences.” Whenever I’ve talked to people who talk about the woke ideology, no one ever got forced. If you look at Dylan McDermott, if there was a way to gauge the number of impressions that she had, and where they sourced from, I’d be willing bet any amount of money that 90% plus of the impressions and discussions of Dylan McDermott were on, right-leaning media.
The criticism that Jordan Peterson could provide, I guess he said that Dylan Mulvaney popularized the kind of mutilation in his view, that can affect… There’s a very serious life-changing process that a person goes through, and when that’s applied to a child, it can do a lot of harm to a person if…
But the bigger point is there are no numbers for 2023 when, post-Dylan McDermott. So there’s no way to know if the assertion is true, even marginally true. Now, you can easily suggest it, but you can say that about any social media influencer. Kids are dying because… It’s just like when people accused Trump of potentially influencing people to inject bleach into their veins. That’s a big old leap to say that because Trump says it, that people are going to start injecting, and then they find somebody who actually did. And it’s like, “Oh, it must be true. This is a trend now.” I’m just not buying it that there aren’t enough roadblocks in the way.
Now, I’m not saying it never happens, and for me, to me, you should have to wait until you’re 18 to actually have any surgery to transition. And if your parents approve it earlier, then you can have a conversation with your doctor. But you’re suggesting that everybody in that process to transition, a minor is corrupt. That the doctor, the sociologist, the psychologist, all the people involved, the hospital where the surgery is happening, the insurance company that’s paying for it, they all have been corrupted by this trend. I just don’t see that.
That’s basically quoting you, but in a caricature. And you responded, “While, I have your attention. Wanted to say thank you! Your consultants at Tesla followed up about using Cost Plus drugs…” About which we’ll talk about. “… To save the company money. Truly appreciated.” And in parentheses, “(My limit is 300 years of darkness.)” Very well done, Mark.
What’s your intuition, if we just stick on Biden and Trump for a sec, what’s your intuition why Biden would make a better president than Trump?
Now, compare that to Trump, the people closest to him, almost all of them turned, unless there’s a financial relationship involved, and to me that says everything.
Then I look at the other guy, never admits a mistake, and the list is long.
And now, in a lot of states, because of the Conservatives, they’ve passed laws saying you have to show identification. When I voted in Texas, you had to show state identification. They can’t vote. You can’t register as an illegal alien, that I’m aware of, to vote.
There’s still enough people who believe in this country and how amazing it is to do the right thing. And a lot of the premise of what some Conservatives are saying and doing, the underpinning of it is that their fellow citizens will not do anything, not some things, anything, that serves the best interest of this country. And to me, that’s just wrong. That is just misleading and wrong.
Remember, when Biden was vice president and Obama was president, they called Obama, the Deporter in Chief. He had no problem deporting people. And I think if I had to guess, and this is just a guess, that when they looked at the initial statistics for immigration when Biden took over, they thought there was room for more immigrants, not because they would vote, but you can make a fiscal argument that, in a world where the birth rate is flat to declining, we need immigrants. And immigrants typically don’t have a higher crime rate or anything than indigenous American citizens. Indigenous isn’t the right word, but American citizens. And so they made a calculated mistake. They made a decision that was wrong, and now they have to fix it or it’s going to hurt them severely.
But I don’t buy what Elon’s pushing that the whole reason is they are voters and will become voters.
The hard part, and why I like this conversation, is how do you distinguish hyperbole versus reality? And I get where you’re going, Lex, where it’s like what… The smallest spark sometimes can cause people to change, and then that spark becomes bigger, and then it becomes more widespread, and then all of a sudden your country has changed. It’s not what you thought it was. I get that completely. And yes, you always have to be on top of that to make sure, but a lot of that comes from lack of leadership, and lack of trust, because there’s nobody who’s saying, “All right, Republicans, that’s all hyperbole and you’re wrong for that. Democrats, you fucked up on immigration. You up in Afghanistan. Here’s where you made these mistakes. Own it.”
There’s nobody who says, “We’re not going to just bring in Republicans if the Republicans win.” And there’s nobody who says, “We’re not going to just bring in Democrats. We’re going to bring in a mix. We’re going to try to get balance on the Supreme Court.” There’s no leadership that’s doing it. That’s the fundamental problem. It’s not about the ideology of woke. No leadership.
We were able to get that claims data, and it turns out we spent $169,000 with that PBM, one of the big three PBMs, and it would’ve cost us buying from Cost Plus Drugs $19,000. And that’s just a simple example. Then I looked at the insurance side of things. We self-insure, so there weren’t premiums per se, but we were getting charged $17.15 cents per employee per month just to use the network that they put together for us, providers, hospitals or whatever. And I’m like, all right, are there companies that won’t charge us to put together these networks? Turns out there’s a lot of them. And those insurance companies and those PBMs are also responsible for determining what claims, what to authorize and what to deny. So for a drug, it may be, all right, this is an expensive drug, but before they’ll say they’ll pay for the drug that your doctor wants to prescribe for you, you have to try these three other drugs in what’s called step up therapy to see if these other cheaper drugs work or they’re not even necessarily cheaper, they may be being pushed because they’re getting a higher rebate.
And so I’m like, that’s insane. I want my employees to get the medication that the doctors say is best. And so I didn’t realize those were the intricacies of where my healthcare dollars went. There’s not a single CEO who does because that’s not a core competency that they need. And the CFOs, that’s not their core competency and the HR people, they contribute and they understand it some because they’re dealing with the claims, but they spend most of their prescription drug related time or healthcare related times trying to get pre-authorizations approved. So your kid breaks their arm or you get sick and you go to the doctor and before the doctor will do a surgery or do whatever, they have to go to the insurance company and get preauthorized. And then they always say no. And then you have to go back and somebody has to argue for you. And that just eats up employee time because I’m sick or my kid’s sick and you’re wasting my time. Eats up HR time.
The CEOs don’t know any of this, right? So what I’m saying is one, the smartest thing to do is to get a healthcare CEO at every company with over let’s say 500 employees that focuses on all these things. You’d save a shitload of money. And two, healthcare is your second largest line item expense after payroll. And in some companies it’s hundreds, billions of dollars and you don’t understand it and you’re letting these guys rip you off? And it’s because these big CEOs don’t understand it and are getting ripped off that the industry is the way it is because that allows the opacity to continue.
And I’m like, well, if he can just jack up the price to this drug and charge more and get away with it, this has to be an incredibly inefficient market. And so the question is why is he able to do it? And it was immediately apparent that it was a lack of transparency. And so can we start a company that is fully transparent with our costs, our markup and our selling price, and see if it works? And so we went for it and it took off immediately. I mean, you read a press release from a company saying they were creating a cost advantage program basically pretending to replicate us? We haven’t been in business two years. How insane is that?
And the most insane part of it is yes, with corporate employer insurance, that happens, but it happens more with Medicare Part D and Medicare Advantage. It happens all the time with those, almost with every script. So the government is complicit in these community pharmacies going out of business. So how does that connect to Cost Plus Drugs and what we’re doing and the big brands? The big brands know that if all these community pharmacies are going, tens of thousands of them are going to go out of business because of the way this pricing is, they’re going to lose a connection between their brand medications and grandma and grandpa and Aunt Sally and all that business is going to get transferred to the big companies and they’re going to have even less leverage. So they’re working with us to come up with programs that are very supportive of independent pharmacies, and that’s going to allow us to break the cartel because it’s in their best interest not to allow them to be so vertically integrated that they destroy the entire community and independent pharmacy industry.
I mean, it wasn’t until I got a job at Mellon Bank and I started learning how to program in this thing called Ramus, this scripting computing language that I realized, oh, this is interesting to me and I like it. And that’s what got me a job selling software and going on from there. You just don’t know what that’s going to be until you go out and experience different things. So for anybody young out there listening, enjoy your life. Find things to smile about, be curious, read, watch, expose yourself to as many different ideas as you can because something’s going to click at some point. You may be 15, you may be 25, you may be 55, but it can happen.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 0:54 – Entrepreneurship
- 15:48 – Shark Tank
- 26:13 – How Mark made first billion
- 52:24 – Dallas Mavericks
- 57:49 – DEI debate
- 1:33:42 – Trump vs Biden
- 1:36:04 – Immigration
- 1:45:37 – Drugs and Big Pharma
- 2:01:38 – AI
- 2:05:49 – Advice for young people
Introduction
Mark Cuban
The person who controls the algorithm controls the world, right? And if you are committed to one specific platform as your singular source of information or affiliated platforms, then whoever controls the algorithm or the programming there controls you.
The person who controls the algorithm controls the world, right? And if you are committed to one specific platform as your singular source of information or affiliated platforms, then whoever controls the algorithm or the programming there controls you.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Mark Cuban, a multi-billionaire businessman, an investor and star of the series Shark Tank, longtime principal owner of the Dallas Mavericks, and is someone who is unafraid to get into frequent battles on X, most recently over topics of DEI, wokeism, gender and identity politics with the likes of Elon Musk and Jordan Peterson. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Mark Cuban.
The following is a conversation with Mark Cuban, a multi-billionaire businessman, an investor and star of the series Shark Tank, longtime principal owner of the Dallas Mavericks, and is someone who is unafraid to get into frequent battles on X, most recently over topics of DEI, wokeism, gender and identity politics with the likes of Elon Musk and Jordan Peterson. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Mark Cuban.
Entrepreneurship
You’ve started many businesses, invested in many businesses, heard a lot of pitches privately and on Shark Tank. So you’re the perfect person to ask what makes a great entrepreneur?
Mark Cuban
Somebody who’s curious, they want to keep on learning because business is ever-changing. It’s never static. Somebody who’s agile, because as you learn new things and the environment around you changes, you have to be able to adapt and make the changes. And somebody who can sell, because no business has ever survived without sales. And as an entrepreneur who’s creating a company, whatever your product or service is, if that’s not the most important thing and you’re just dying and excited to tell people about it, then you’re not going to succeed.
Somebody who’s curious, they want to keep on learning because business is ever-changing. It’s never static. Somebody who’s agile, because as you learn new things and the environment around you changes, you have to be able to adapt and make the changes. And somebody who can sell, because no business has ever survived without sales. And as an entrepreneur who’s creating a company, whatever your product or service is, if that’s not the most important thing and you’re just dying and excited to tell people about it, then you’re not going to succeed.
Lex Fridman
But it’s also a skill thing. How do you sell? What do you mean by selling?
But it’s also a skill thing. How do you sell? What do you mean by selling?
Mark Cuban
Selling is just helping. I’ve always looked at it about putting myself in the shoes of another person and asking a simple question, can I help this person? Can my product help them? From the time I was 12 years old, selling garbage bags door to door and just asking a simple question, do you use garbage bags? Do you need garbage bags? Well, let me save you some time. I’ll bring them to your house and drop them off to streaming. Why do we need streaming when we have TV and radio? Well, you can’t get access to your TV and radio everywhere you go. So we break down geographic and physical barriers, and Cost Plus Drugs. What’s the product that we actually sell? We sell trust. In a simplistic approach, we buy drugs to sell drugs, but we add transparency to it. And bringing transparency to an industry is a differentiation, and it helps people.
Selling is just helping. I’ve always looked at it about putting myself in the shoes of another person and asking a simple question, can I help this person? Can my product help them? From the time I was 12 years old, selling garbage bags door to door and just asking a simple question, do you use garbage bags? Do you need garbage bags? Well, let me save you some time. I’ll bring them to your house and drop them off to streaming. Why do we need streaming when we have TV and radio? Well, you can’t get access to your TV and radio everywhere you go. So we break down geographic and physical barriers, and Cost Plus Drugs. What’s the product that we actually sell? We sell trust. In a simplistic approach, we buy drugs to sell drugs, but we add transparency to it. And bringing transparency to an industry is a differentiation, and it helps people.
Lex Fridman
Trust in an industry that’s highly lacking in trust.
Trust in an industry that’s highly lacking in trust.
Mark Cuban
Exactly.
Exactly.
Lex Fridman
Okay. So what’s the trick to selling garbage bags? Let’s go back there. At 12 years old, is it just your natural charisma? I guess a good question to ask, are you born with it or can you develop it?
Okay. So what’s the trick to selling garbage bags? Let’s go back there. At 12 years old, is it just your natural charisma? I guess a good question to ask, are you born with it or can you develop it?
Mark Cuban
Oh, you can definitely develop it. Yeah. Because selling garbage bags door to door was easy, right? It was like… 12-year-old Mark going, “Hi, my name is Mark. Do you use garbage bags?” You know what the answer is going to be, right? “Can I just drop them off for you once a week? Whenever you need them, you just call and I’ll bring them down.” “Sure.” So that was easy.
Oh, you can definitely develop it. Yeah. Because selling garbage bags door to door was easy, right? It was like… 12-year-old Mark going, “Hi, my name is Mark. Do you use garbage bags?” You know what the answer is going to be, right? “Can I just drop them off for you once a week? Whenever you need them, you just call and I’ll bring them down.” “Sure.” So that was easy.
Lex Fridman
But I’m sure you’ve been rejected.
But I’m sure you’ve been rejected.
Mark Cuban
Oh, yeah. Of course. Not everybody says yes.
Oh, yeah. Of course. Not everybody says yes.
Lex Fridman
What was your percentage?
What was your percentage?
Mark Cuban
I don’t remember, but it’s pretty close to a hundred percent.
I don’t remember, but it’s pretty close to a hundred percent.
Lex Fridman
Oh, okay. So that’s why you don’t remember.
Oh, okay. So that’s why you don’t remember.
Mark Cuban
Yeah. Right? Because who’s going to say no to a 12-year-old kid who’s going to save time and money? But typically, my career where I’ve started companies, it’s to do something that other people aren’t doing. Whether it was connecting PCs to local area networks and at MicroSolutions. And the salesmanship was walking into a company and just saying, look talk to me and I can help you improve your productivity and your profitability. Is that important to you? And the answer is obviously always yes. And then the question is, can I do the job and can I do it cost effectively? And so you didn’t have to be a born salesperson to be able to ask those questions, but you have to be able to be willing to put in the time to learn that business. And that’s the hardest part.
Yeah. Right? Because who’s going to say no to a 12-year-old kid who’s going to save time and money? But typically, my career where I’ve started companies, it’s to do something that other people aren’t doing. Whether it was connecting PCs to local area networks and at MicroSolutions. And the salesmanship was walking into a company and just saying, look talk to me and I can help you improve your productivity and your profitability. Is that important to you? And the answer is obviously always yes. And then the question is, can I do the job and can I do it cost effectively? And so you didn’t have to be a born salesperson to be able to ask those questions, but you have to be able to be willing to put in the time to learn that business. And that’s the hardest part.
Lex Fridman
I’m sure there’s a skill thing to it too, in how you solve the puzzle of communicating with a person and convincing them.
I’m sure there’s a skill thing to it too, in how you solve the puzzle of communicating with a person and convincing them.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, there’s skill from the perspective that I read like a maniac. Then now you can give me an example of any type of business and it’ll take me two seconds to figure out how they make money and how I can make them more productive. And I think that’s probably my biggest skill, being able to just drill down to what the actual need is, if any. And then from there, being able to say, well, if this is what this company does, and this is what their goal is, how can I introduce something new that they haven’t seen before? And is that a business that I can create and make money from?
Yeah, there’s skill from the perspective that I read like a maniac. Then now you can give me an example of any type of business and it’ll take me two seconds to figure out how they make money and how I can make them more productive. And I think that’s probably my biggest skill, being able to just drill down to what the actual need is, if any. And then from there, being able to say, well, if this is what this company does, and this is what their goal is, how can I introduce something new that they haven’t seen before? And is that a business that I can create and make money from?
Lex Fridman
So figure out how this kind of business makes money in the present and then figure out, is there a way to make more money in the future by introducing a totally new kind of thing?
So figure out how this kind of business makes money in the present and then figure out, is there a way to make more money in the future by introducing a totally new kind of thing?
Mark Cuban
Correct.
Correct.
Lex Fridman
And you can just do that with anything.
And you can just do that with anything.
Mark Cuban
Pretty much. Yeah.
Pretty much. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
And you think you’re born with that?
And you think you’re born with that?
Mark Cuban
No, I worked at it. Because going back to what I said earlier about curiosity, you have to be insanely curious because the world is always changing. My dad used to say, we don’t live in the world we were born into, which is absolutely true. If you’re not a voracious consumer of information, then you’re not going to be able to keep up. And no matter what your sales skills or ability are, they’re going to be useless.
No, I worked at it. Because going back to what I said earlier about curiosity, you have to be insanely curious because the world is always changing. My dad used to say, we don’t live in the world we were born into, which is absolutely true. If you’re not a voracious consumer of information, then you’re not going to be able to keep up. And no matter what your sales skills or ability are, they’re going to be useless.
Lex Fridman
You learn about life from your dad. You mentioned your dad.
You learn about life from your dad. You mentioned your dad.
Mark Cuban
My dad did upholstery on cars, got up, went to work every morning at seven o’clock, came back five or six, seven o’clock, exhausted, and I learned to be nice. I learned to be caring. I learned to be accepting. Just qualities that I think he really tried to pass on to myself and my two younger brothers were just be a good human. And I think he didn’t have business experience. So as I got into business, he would just say, “Sorry, Mark, I can’t help you. I don’t understand what you’re doing.” Neither one of my parents had gone to college. You’ve got to figure it out for yourself.
My dad did upholstery on cars, got up, went to work every morning at seven o’clock, came back five or six, seven o’clock, exhausted, and I learned to be nice. I learned to be caring. I learned to be accepting. Just qualities that I think he really tried to pass on to myself and my two younger brothers were just be a good human. And I think he didn’t have business experience. So as I got into business, he would just say, “Sorry, Mark, I can’t help you. I don’t understand what you’re doing.” Neither one of my parents had gone to college. You’ve got to figure it out for yourself.
But he was also very insistent that… He worked at a company called Regency Products where they did upholstery on cars, and he would bring me there to sweep the floors, not because he wanted me to learn that business, because he wanted me to learn how backbreaking that work was. He lost an eye in an accident at work, a staple broke, and the only thing he wanted for my brothers and I was for us to never have to work like that, to go to college to figure it out.
Lex Fridman
You said to be nice. That said, you also said that when you were first starting a business, you were a bit more of an asshole than you wish you would’ve been.
You said to be nice. That said, you also said that when you were first starting a business, you were a bit more of an asshole than you wish you would’ve been.
Mark Cuban
Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah, because I was more of a yeller. I didn’t have-
Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah, because I was more of a yeller. I didn’t have-
Lex Fridman
No, really? Mark Cuban?
No, really? Mark Cuban?
Mark Cuban
What you see on the sidelines would be at a Mavs’ game. Maybe a little bit. But I also didn’t have any patience for somebody I thought wasn’t using my common sense, because I was always on the go, go, go, go, go, particularly when I was younger, just trying to be successful, trying to get to the point where I had independence. And I would tell this to people. Either you’re speeding up and getting on the train, or we’ll stop and drop you off at the next station, but let’s go where you go.
What you see on the sidelines would be at a Mavs’ game. Maybe a little bit. But I also didn’t have any patience for somebody I thought wasn’t using my common sense, because I was always on the go, go, go, go, go, particularly when I was younger, just trying to be successful, trying to get to the point where I had independence. And I would tell this to people. Either you’re speeding up and getting on the train, or we’ll stop and drop you off at the next station, but let’s go where you go.
Lex Fridman
Did you have trouble with the hire fast, fire fast part of running a business?
Did you have trouble with the hire fast, fire fast part of running a business?
Mark Cuban
Yeah, always, because I hated firing people. ‘Cause it meant, one, it was an admission of a mistake in the hiring. And two, the salesperson in me always wanted to come out ahead, and I was always horrible at firing, but I always partnered with people who had no problem with it. So I always delegated that.
Yeah, always, because I hated firing people. ‘Cause it meant, one, it was an admission of a mistake in the hiring. And two, the salesperson in me always wanted to come out ahead, and I was always horrible at firing, but I always partnered with people who had no problem with it. So I always delegated that.
Lex Fridman
Well, that’s the tricky thing. When you’re working with somebody and they’re not quite there, and you have to decide, are they going to step up and grow into the person that that’s the right or they’re not. And in that gray area is probably where you have to fire.
Well, that’s the tricky thing. When you’re working with somebody and they’re not quite there, and you have to decide, are they going to step up and grow into the person that that’s the right or they’re not. And in that gray area is probably where you have to fire.
Mark Cuban
Well, it’s hard, yeah, for sure because it’s obviously a failure somewhere in the process. What did we do wrong? And when I would interview people for jobs, 99% of the people I’ve ever interviewed I’ve wanted to hire, because in my mind, it was like, okay, I can figure out how to make this person work. And then they wouldn’t. And then people at the company would be like, “Mark, you suck at this.” And so I always delegated the hiring.
Well, it’s hard, yeah, for sure because it’s obviously a failure somewhere in the process. What did we do wrong? And when I would interview people for jobs, 99% of the people I’ve ever interviewed I’ve wanted to hire, because in my mind, it was like, okay, I can figure out how to make this person work. And then they wouldn’t. And then people at the company would be like, “Mark, you suck at this.” And so I always delegated the hiring.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I’m the same. I see the potential in people. I see the beauty in people, which is a great way to live life. But when you’re running a company, it’s a different thing.
Yeah, I’m the same. I see the potential in people. I see the beauty in people, which is a great way to live life. But when you’re running a company, it’s a different thing.
Mark Cuban
It’s different. And you got to know what you’re good at and what you’re bad at, right? I was good at… I was a ready-fire-aim guy, and I always partnered with people who were very anal and perfectionist because where I could just go, go, go, go, go, go, they would keep me inside the baselines.
It’s different. And you got to know what you’re good at and what you’re bad at, right? I was good at… I was a ready-fire-aim guy, and I always partnered with people who were very anal and perfectionist because where I could just go, go, go, go, go, go, they would keep me inside the baselines.
Lex Fridman
They would do the due diligence, I suppose.
They would do the due diligence, I suppose.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, or just, yeah, the detail work, the dot the I’s and the cross the T’s.
Yeah, or just, yeah, the detail work, the dot the I’s and the cross the T’s.
Lex Fridman
What does it take to take that first leap into starting a business?
What does it take to take that first leap into starting a business?
Mark Cuban
That’s the hardest part. It really depends on your personal circumstances. I got fired. I was sleeping on the floor of six guys in a three-bedroom apartment, so I couldn’t go any lower. So there was no downside.
That’s the hardest part. It really depends on your personal circumstances. I got fired. I was sleeping on the floor of six guys in a three-bedroom apartment, so I couldn’t go any lower. So there was no downside.
Lex Fridman
Starting at the bottom.
Starting at the bottom.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, there was no downside for me starting a business. And it was just like… I was 25 when we started MicroSolutions, and I’d just gotten fired and it was like, look, I’m a lousy employee. I’m going to just start going to some of my prospects that I had at my job and asked them to front the money that I needed to install some software and found this company, Architectural Lighting, who put up $500 for me. That allowed me to buy software and have 50% margins and that’s how I started my company.
Yeah, there was no downside for me starting a business. And it was just like… I was 25 when we started MicroSolutions, and I’d just gotten fired and it was like, look, I’m a lousy employee. I’m going to just start going to some of my prospects that I had at my job and asked them to front the money that I needed to install some software and found this company, Architectural Lighting, who put up $500 for me. That allowed me to buy software and have 50% margins and that’s how I started my company.
Lex Fridman
But by way of advice, would you say? It’s a terrifying thing.
But by way of advice, would you say? It’s a terrifying thing.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, you’ve got to be in a position where you’re confident. I get emails and approached by people all the time, what kind of business should I start? That tells me you’re not ready to start a business. Either you’re prepared and you know it or you don’t. In the United States, with the American Dream, everybody always looks at themselves and say, okay, I have this idea. And then you go through this process of saying, okay. You talk to your friends or family, what do you think? And they almost always, oh, it’s a great idea. Then you go on Google and you say, oh my god, no one else is doing it. Without thinking, 10 companies have gone out of business trying the same thing. But okay, it’s on Google. And then people stop because that next step means, okay, I have to change what I’m doing in my life.
Yeah, you’ve got to be in a position where you’re confident. I get emails and approached by people all the time, what kind of business should I start? That tells me you’re not ready to start a business. Either you’re prepared and you know it or you don’t. In the United States, with the American Dream, everybody always looks at themselves and say, okay, I have this idea. And then you go through this process of saying, okay. You talk to your friends or family, what do you think? And they almost always, oh, it’s a great idea. Then you go on Google and you say, oh my god, no one else is doing it. Without thinking, 10 companies have gone out of business trying the same thing. But okay, it’s on Google. And then people stop because that next step means, okay, I have to change what I’m doing in my life.
And that’s not easy for 99% of the people. Some people look at that as an opportunity and get excited about it. Some people get terrified because it’s, okay, maybe I’m comfortable, maybe I have responsibilities. And so whatever your circumstances are, if you want to take that next step, you have to be able to deal with the consequences of changing your circumstances. And that’s the first thing. Do you save money? If you have a job, but d’you have a mortgage? Do you have a family? You’ve got to save money. You can’t just walk. They’ve got to eat and they’ve got to have shelter. But on the other side of the coin, if you’ve got nothing, it’s the perfect time to start a business.
Lex Fridman
Desperation is a good catalyst for starting a business, but in many cases, the decision, as you’re talking about you’re going to have to make is to leave a job that’s providing some degree of comfort already. So I suppose when you’re sleeping on the floor and there’s six guys, it’s a little bit easier.
Desperation is a good catalyst for starting a business, but in many cases, the decision, as you’re talking about you’re going to have to make is to leave a job that’s providing some degree of comfort already. So I suppose when you’re sleeping on the floor and there’s six guys, it’s a little bit easier.
Mark Cuban
It’s really easy, right? Particularly when you get fired and you don’t have a job and you’re looking at bartending at night to try to pay the bills. And so it wasn’t hard for me, but to your point, it really comes down to preparation. If it’s important enough to you, you’ll save the money. You’ll give up whatever it is you need to give up to put the money aside. If you have obligations, you’ll put in the work to learn as much as you can about that industry so that when you start your business, you’re prepared. And you can always, at night, on weekends, whenever you find time, lunch, start making the calls to find out if people will write you a check or transfer you the money to buy whatever it is you’re selling. And by doing those things, you can put yourself in a position to succeed. It’s where people just think, okay, Geronimo, I’m leafing off the edge of a cliff and I’m starting a business. That’s tough.
It’s really easy, right? Particularly when you get fired and you don’t have a job and you’re looking at bartending at night to try to pay the bills. And so it wasn’t hard for me, but to your point, it really comes down to preparation. If it’s important enough to you, you’ll save the money. You’ll give up whatever it is you need to give up to put the money aside. If you have obligations, you’ll put in the work to learn as much as you can about that industry so that when you start your business, you’re prepared. And you can always, at night, on weekends, whenever you find time, lunch, start making the calls to find out if people will write you a check or transfer you the money to buy whatever it is you’re selling. And by doing those things, you can put yourself in a position to succeed. It’s where people just think, okay, Geronimo, I’m leafing off the edge of a cliff and I’m starting a business. That’s tough.
Lex Fridman
But sometimes that’s the way you do it, though.
But sometimes that’s the way you do it, though.
Mark Cuban
There’s always examples of any situation or scenario, right?
There’s always examples of any situation or scenario, right?
Lex Fridman
Anecdotal evidence for everything.
Anecdotal evidence for everything.
Mark Cuban
But if you’re going into a new business, you’re going to have competition unless you’re really, really, really, really, really lucky. And that competition is not going to just say, okay, let Lex or Mark just kick our ass. And so, you’ve got to be prepared on how you’re going to deal with that competition.
But if you’re going into a new business, you’re going to have competition unless you’re really, really, really, really, really lucky. And that competition is not going to just say, okay, let Lex or Mark just kick our ass. And so, you’ve got to be prepared on how you’re going to deal with that competition.
Lex Fridman
What do you think that is about America that has so many people who have that dream and act on that dream of starting a business?
What do you think that is about America that has so many people who have that dream and act on that dream of starting a business?
Mark Cuban
I think we’ve just got a culture of consumption and more. And to get more, you’ve got to… Creating a business gives you the greatest potential upside and the greatest leverage on your time, but it also creates the most risk.
I think we’ve just got a culture of consumption and more. And to get more, you’ve got to… Creating a business gives you the greatest potential upside and the greatest leverage on your time, but it also creates the most risk.
Lex Fridman
So that capitalist machine, there’s a lot of elements. By contrast, the respect for the law, like an entrepreneur can trust that if they pull it off, the law will protect them. There won’t be a government.
So that capitalist machine, there’s a lot of elements. By contrast, the respect for the law, like an entrepreneur can trust that if they pull it off, the law will protect them. There won’t be a government.
Mark Cuban
Hopefully that’s still the case. Yeah.
Hopefully that’s still the case. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Well, yeah. There’s always…
Well, yeah. There’s always…
Mark Cuban
Versus other countries, right? So us versus other countries. Joe Biden of all people said to me, it was at an entrepreneurship conference that when he was vice president, he had put together, and we had gone up there, a bunch of us from Shark Tank to talk to young entrepreneurs from around the world. And he said to me, “Mark, I’ve been to every country around the world, and the one thing that separates us is entrepreneurship. We’re the most entrepreneurial country in the world, and there’s no one else who’s even close.” And when you look at the origin of the biggest companies in the world, for the most part, there’s an American origin story somewhere behind there. And I think that just gets perpetuated on itself. We see those Horatio Alger stories, we see examples of the Jeff Bezos of the world, the Steve Jobs of the world, and those are the types of people we want to copy.
Versus other countries, right? So us versus other countries. Joe Biden of all people said to me, it was at an entrepreneurship conference that when he was vice president, he had put together, and we had gone up there, a bunch of us from Shark Tank to talk to young entrepreneurs from around the world. And he said to me, “Mark, I’ve been to every country around the world, and the one thing that separates us is entrepreneurship. We’re the most entrepreneurial country in the world, and there’s no one else who’s even close.” And when you look at the origin of the biggest companies in the world, for the most part, there’s an American origin story somewhere behind there. And I think that just gets perpetuated on itself. We see those Horatio Alger stories, we see examples of the Jeff Bezos of the world, the Steve Jobs of the world, and those are the types of people we want to copy.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, we want to be really careful and try to really figure out what that is because we don’t want to lose that.
Yeah, we want to be really careful and try to really figure out what that is because we don’t want to lose that.
Mark Cuban
For sure.
For sure.
Lex Fridman
We want to protect the… Whatever. And that’s a lot of the discussions about what’s the right way to do government, big government, small government, what’s the right policies, but also culture, who we celebrate. One of the things that troubles me is that we don’t enough celebrate the entrepreneurs that take risks and the entrepreneurs that succeed. It seems like success, especially when it comes with wealth, is immediately matched with distrust and criticism and all that kind of stuff.
We want to protect the… Whatever. And that’s a lot of the discussions about what’s the right way to do government, big government, small government, what’s the right policies, but also culture, who we celebrate. One of the things that troubles me is that we don’t enough celebrate the entrepreneurs that take risks and the entrepreneurs that succeed. It seems like success, especially when it comes with wealth, is immediately matched with distrust and criticism and all that kind of stuff.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, well, it’s changing for sure, because you can go back just 12 years, right? Traditional media dominated, let’s just say through 2012, that was the peak of linear television. Newspapers weren’t as strong, but they still had some breadth and depth to them. And then social media comes along and everybody gets to play in their own sandbox and share opinions with people who think just like them. And it also gives them the opportunity to amplify those feelings. And I think that’s where celebrating entrepreneurs really started to subside some. There were always people who were progressive that were like, billionaires are bad or millionaires are bad, depending on the time period, but you didn’t really see it on an ongoing basis. It wasn’t going to be on the evening news. It wasn’t going to be in the front page of the newspaper. It was going to be if you read a book and someone talked about it, or you read a magazine and there was an article talking about this progressive movement or that progressive movement, whatever it may be, or political parties. But now all of that is front and center in social media.
Yeah, well, it’s changing for sure, because you can go back just 12 years, right? Traditional media dominated, let’s just say through 2012, that was the peak of linear television. Newspapers weren’t as strong, but they still had some breadth and depth to them. And then social media comes along and everybody gets to play in their own sandbox and share opinions with people who think just like them. And it also gives them the opportunity to amplify those feelings. And I think that’s where celebrating entrepreneurs really started to subside some. There were always people who were progressive that were like, billionaires are bad or millionaires are bad, depending on the time period, but you didn’t really see it on an ongoing basis. It wasn’t going to be on the evening news. It wasn’t going to be in the front page of the newspaper. It was going to be if you read a book and someone talked about it, or you read a magazine and there was an article talking about this progressive movement or that progressive movement, whatever it may be, or political parties. But now all of that is front and center in social media.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, we’re trying to figure it out, how we deal with the mobs of people and the virality of it all. And I think we’ll find our footing and start celebrating greatness again.
Yeah, we’re trying to figure it out, how we deal with the mobs of people and the virality of it all. And I think we’ll find our footing and start celebrating greatness again.
Shark Tank
Mark Cuban
Well, that’s the whole reason I do Shark Tank.
Well, that’s the whole reason I do Shark Tank.
Lex Fridman
That’s true. That show celebrates the entrepreneur. That’s true.
That’s true. That show celebrates the entrepreneur. That’s true.
Mark Cuban
t’s the only place where every single minute of every single episode, we celebrate the American Dream. And the reason I do it is we tell the entire country, and it’s shown around the world even, we’re amazing advertising for the American Dream, and I don’t even know how many countries, but every time somebody walks onto that carpet from Dubuque, Iowa or Ketchum, Idaho, that sends a message to every kid who’s watching, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12-year-old kid that if they can do it from Ketchum, Idaho, you can do it. If they can have this idea and get a deal or even present to the Sharks and have all of America see it, you can do it. And I’m proud of that. 15 years of that, it’s just been insane. Now kids walk up to me and go, yeah, I started watching you when I was five or 10, and I started a business because I learned about it from Shark Tank. And so I think it celebrates it, and we convey it, and I don’t think it’s going away, but there are different battles we have to fight to support it.
t’s the only place where every single minute of every single episode, we celebrate the American Dream. And the reason I do it is we tell the entire country, and it’s shown around the world even, we’re amazing advertising for the American Dream, and I don’t even know how many countries, but every time somebody walks onto that carpet from Dubuque, Iowa or Ketchum, Idaho, that sends a message to every kid who’s watching, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12-year-old kid that if they can do it from Ketchum, Idaho, you can do it. If they can have this idea and get a deal or even present to the Sharks and have all of America see it, you can do it. And I’m proud of that. 15 years of that, it’s just been insane. Now kids walk up to me and go, yeah, I started watching you when I was five or 10, and I started a business because I learned about it from Shark Tank. And so I think it celebrates it, and we convey it, and I don’t think it’s going away, but there are different battles we have to fight to support it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I love even when the business idea is obviously horrible. Just the guts to step up.
Yeah, I love even when the business idea is obviously horrible. Just the guts to step up.
Mark Cuban
To be there.
To be there.
Lex Fridman
To believe in yourself. To really reach. That’s what matters, because some of the best business ideas are probably, maybe even you and Shark Tank will laugh at.
To believe in yourself. To really reach. That’s what matters, because some of the best business ideas are probably, maybe even you and Shark Tank will laugh at.
Mark Cuban
Oh, for sure. Without question. The good ones, we’re not going to recognize every good one. And then sometimes we’ll just motivate people to work even harder to get it done because of what we say to them, and that’s fine too. There’s been great success stories that we said no to.
Oh, for sure. Without question. The good ones, we’re not going to recognize every good one. And then sometimes we’ll just motivate people to work even harder to get it done because of what we say to them, and that’s fine too. There’s been great success stories that we said no to.
Lex Fridman
What stands out as a memorable business on you’ve been pitched on Shark Tank. What’s the best one that stands out on-
What stands out as a memorable business on you’ve been pitched on Shark Tank. What’s the best one that stands out on-
Mark Cuban
There’s no best one, right? They’re all different. They’re all best in their own way, I guess. There’re stupid ones, and we haven’t had any world-changing earth-shattering ones because those aren’t going to apply to Shark Tank. They don’t need us. So we typically get businesses that need some help at some level or another. But there’s ones I’ve passed that I wish Spikeball, do you know what Spikeball is? So it’s just rebounding net that you can put on the beach and you have these yellow balls, and you play a game of, it’s just a competitive game, but they’re killing it. So if you go to beaches in New York or LA, you’ll see kids playing it all the time. And it was a fun game that I wish I had done a deal with, and there’s been others.
There’s no best one, right? They’re all different. They’re all best in their own way, I guess. There’re stupid ones, and we haven’t had any world-changing earth-shattering ones because those aren’t going to apply to Shark Tank. They don’t need us. So we typically get businesses that need some help at some level or another. But there’s ones I’ve passed that I wish Spikeball, do you know what Spikeball is? So it’s just rebounding net that you can put on the beach and you have these yellow balls, and you play a game of, it’s just a competitive game, but they’re killing it. So if you go to beaches in New York or LA, you’ll see kids playing it all the time. And it was a fun game that I wish I had done a deal with, and there’s been others.
Lex Fridman
And you passed.
And you passed.
Mark Cuban
And I passed. They were getting some traction and they wanted to create leagues, Spikeball leagues, and they wanted me to be the commissioner, and I don’t want to be a commissioner of a new Spikeball league.
And I passed. They were getting some traction and they wanted to create leagues, Spikeball leagues, and they wanted me to be the commissioner, and I don’t want to be a commissioner of a new Spikeball league.
Lex Fridman
So you have to have this gut feeling of will this scale, will this click with people?
So you have to have this gut feeling of will this scale, will this click with people?
Mark Cuban
Of course, yeah. Can it be protected? Is it differentiated? Is it something that makes me think, why didn’t I think of that? Or is it just a good solid business that’s going to pay a return to the founder and may not be enough of a business to return to an investor?
Of course, yeah. Can it be protected? Is it differentiated? Is it something that makes me think, why didn’t I think of that? Or is it just a good solid business that’s going to pay a return to the founder and may not be enough of a business to return to an investor?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and I guess the question you’re trying to see, will this scale? There’s promise? Will the promise materialize into a big thing?
Yeah, and I guess the question you’re trying to see, will this scale? There’s promise? Will the promise materialize into a big thing?
Mark Cuban
Well, see, I don’t even care if it’s going to be a big thing, right? Because it’s all relative to the entrepreneur. We had a nineteen-year-old from Pittsburgh Laney, who came on with this simple sugar scrub, and there was nothing outrageously special about it. I didn’t see it becoming a hundred-million-dollar business. I thought it could become a two, three, five-million-dollar business that paid the bills for her. And that was good enough. And six months after the show aired, she called me up, she goes, “Mark, I’ve got a million dollars in the bank. What am I going to do?” I’m like, “Enjoy it. Put aside money for your taxes and go back to work.” And so it doesn’t have to be a huge business. It’s just got to be one that makes the entrepreneur happy.
Well, see, I don’t even care if it’s going to be a big thing, right? Because it’s all relative to the entrepreneur. We had a nineteen-year-old from Pittsburgh Laney, who came on with this simple sugar scrub, and there was nothing outrageously special about it. I didn’t see it becoming a hundred-million-dollar business. I thought it could become a two, three, five-million-dollar business that paid the bills for her. And that was good enough. And six months after the show aired, she called me up, she goes, “Mark, I’ve got a million dollars in the bank. What am I going to do?” I’m like, “Enjoy it. Put aside money for your taxes and go back to work.” And so it doesn’t have to be a huge business. It’s just got to be one that makes the entrepreneur happy.
Lex Fridman
But then there’s the valuation piece. Do a lot of the entrepreneurs overvalue their business?
But then there’s the valuation piece. Do a lot of the entrepreneurs overvalue their business?
Mark Cuban
Yeah, that’s the nature of it, right? And that’s really where the biggest conflicts in Shark Tank happened. That’s an evaluation. They think this is the best business ever. We had one lady couple that came on and they had this scraper for cat’s tongues, right?
Yeah, that’s the nature of it, right? And that’s really where the biggest conflicts in Shark Tank happened. That’s an evaluation. They think this is the best business ever. We had one lady couple that came on and they had this scraper for cat’s tongues, right?
Lex Fridman
Nice.
Nice.
Mark Cuban
Bizarre. One of the most bizarre pitch ever.
Bizarre. One of the most bizarre pitch ever.
Lex Fridman
I love it.
I love it.
Mark Cuban
And they had this insane valuation and it was on because it was corny and fun TV, not because it was a good business.
And they had this insane valuation and it was on because it was corny and fun TV, not because it was a good business.
Lex Fridman
Oh, really? Okay. You didn’t see the potential.
Oh, really? Okay. You didn’t see the potential.
Mark Cuban
None. Yeah, none.
None. Yeah, none.
Lex Fridman
There’s a lot of cats in the world, Mark. Come on.
There’s a lot of cats in the world, Mark. Come on.
Mark Cuban
Yes, there are. And they’ll go very well without me.
Yes, there are. And they’ll go very well without me.
Lex Fridman
So how do you determine the value of a business, whether it’s on Shark Tank or just in general?
So how do you determine the value of a business, whether it’s on Shark Tank or just in general?
Mark Cuban
It’s actually really easy. So if you take, just to use an example, a business that’s valued at $1 million, and I want to buy 10% of that company for $100,000, then in order for me to get my money back, they’ve got to be able to generate a hundred thousand dollars in after-tax cash flow that they’re able to distribute. Can they do it or can they not? Right? And if it’s a $2 million… Whatever the valuation is, that’s how much cash, after-tax cash they have to generate to return that money to investors. Or the other option is, do I see this as business potentially having an exit? Do they have some unique technology or do they have something specific about them that some other company would want to acquire? Then the cash flow isn’t as, I don’t want to say important, but isn’t going to guide the valuation.
It’s actually really easy. So if you take, just to use an example, a business that’s valued at $1 million, and I want to buy 10% of that company for $100,000, then in order for me to get my money back, they’ve got to be able to generate a hundred thousand dollars in after-tax cash flow that they’re able to distribute. Can they do it or can they not? Right? And if it’s a $2 million… Whatever the valuation is, that’s how much cash, after-tax cash they have to generate to return that money to investors. Or the other option is, do I see this as business potentially having an exit? Do they have some unique technology or do they have something specific about them that some other company would want to acquire? Then the cash flow isn’t as, I don’t want to say important, but isn’t going to guide the valuation.
Lex Fridman
And how do you know if a company’s going to be acquired? So it’s the technology, like the patents, but also the team, is it-
And how do you know if a company’s going to be acquired? So it’s the technology, like the patents, but also the team, is it-
Mark Cuban
Yeah, it could be any of the above. It could be a super products’ company that I think is going to take off.
Yeah, it could be any of the above. It could be a super products’ company that I think is going to take off.
Lex Fridman
And how do you know if they can generate the money? You made it sound easy.
And how do you know if they can generate the money? You made it sound easy.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, can the person sell? And if not them, can I do it or someone on my team do it for them?
Yeah, can the person sell? And if not them, can I do it or someone on my team do it for them?
Lex Fridman
So you’re looking at the person.
So you’re looking at the person.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, for sure. Yeah. That’s where Barbara Corker is the best. She can look at a person and hear them talk for 20 minutes and know, can that person do the job and do the work.
Yeah, for sure. Yeah. That’s where Barbara Corker is the best. She can look at a person and hear them talk for 20 minutes and know, can that person do the job and do the work.
Lex Fridman
Can you tell if they’re full of shit or not? So one of the things with entrepreneurs, they’re like we said, overvaluing, so they’re maybe overselling themselves, but also they might be full of in terms of their understanding of the market or also-
Can you tell if they’re full of shit or not? So one of the things with entrepreneurs, they’re like we said, overvaluing, so they’re maybe overselling themselves, but also they might be full of in terms of their understanding of the market or also-
Mark Cuban
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Lex Fridman
… or exaggerating what they’re think or do, all that kind of stuff. Can you see through that?
… or exaggerating what they’re think or do, all that kind of stuff. Can you see through that?
Mark Cuban
Yeah, for sure. Just by asking questions. So if they are delusional at some level or misleading at another level, I’m going to call them on it. So you get people trying to sell supplements that come on there and it’s a cure for cancer or whatever it may be, or there’s this latest fad that increases your core strength without doing any exercises. Shit Like that I’m just going to bounce, I’m going to pound on them. Right.
Yeah, for sure. Just by asking questions. So if they are delusional at some level or misleading at another level, I’m going to call them on it. So you get people trying to sell supplements that come on there and it’s a cure for cancer or whatever it may be, or there’s this latest fad that increases your core strength without doing any exercises. Shit Like that I’m just going to bounce, I’m going to pound on them. Right.
Lex Fridman
I still love that. I still love the trying. Just trying.
I still love that. I still love the trying. Just trying.
Mark Cuban
No, give them credit, right? Because they know all of America’s going to see it, and they’ve deluded themselves to believe this story so strongly.
No, give them credit, right? Because they know all of America’s going to see it, and they’ve deluded themselves to believe this story so strongly.
Lex Fridman
There’s a delusional aspect to entrepreneurship. You,
There’s a delusional aspect to entrepreneurship. You,
Mark Cuban
That’s a great question. Do you have to be ambitious and set aside reality at some level to think that you can create a company that could be worth 10, a hundred, a billion dollars, yeah, at some level. Because you don’t know. It’s all uncertainty. But I think if you’re delusional, that works against you because everything’s grounded in reality. You’ve got to execute. You’ve got to produce, you can have a vision and you can say, this is where I want to get to and that’s my mission, or this is my driving principle. But you still got to execute on the business plan, and that’s where most people fail.
That’s a great question. Do you have to be ambitious and set aside reality at some level to think that you can create a company that could be worth 10, a hundred, a billion dollars, yeah, at some level. Because you don’t know. It’s all uncertainty. But I think if you’re delusional, that works against you because everything’s grounded in reality. You’ve got to execute. You’ve got to produce, you can have a vision and you can say, this is where I want to get to and that’s my mission, or this is my driving principle. But you still got to execute on the business plan, and that’s where most people fail.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, you have to be kind of two-brained, I guess. You have to be able to dip into reality when you’re thinking about the specifics of the product, how to design things, the first principles, the basics of how to build the thing, how much it’s going to cost, all of that.
Yeah, you have to be kind of two-brained, I guess. You have to be able to dip into reality when you’re thinking about the specifics of the product, how to design things, the first principles, the basics of how to build the thing, how much it’s going to cost, all of that.
Mark Cuban
Yeah. Because if you can’t do the basics, you’re not going to be able to do the bigger things. And at the same time, you’ve got to be… One of the things that entrepreneurs do that I always try to remind any of that I work with on is we all tend to lie to ourselves. Our product is bigger, faster, cheaper, this or that, as if that is a finite situation, that’s never going to change. And there’s always somebody, I call them leapfrog businesses. Whoever’s competing against you, if you do a B or C, they’re going to try to do C, D and E, and you better be prepared for that to come, because otherwise they’re out of business too. So you’re never in a vacuum. You’re always competing against sometimes an unlimited number of entrepreneurs that you don’t even know exist who are trying to kick your ass.
Yeah. Because if you can’t do the basics, you’re not going to be able to do the bigger things. And at the same time, you’ve got to be… One of the things that entrepreneurs do that I always try to remind any of that I work with on is we all tend to lie to ourselves. Our product is bigger, faster, cheaper, this or that, as if that is a finite situation, that’s never going to change. And there’s always somebody, I call them leapfrog businesses. Whoever’s competing against you, if you do a B or C, they’re going to try to do C, D and E, and you better be prepared for that to come, because otherwise they’re out of business too. So you’re never in a vacuum. You’re always competing against sometimes an unlimited number of entrepreneurs that you don’t even know exist who are trying to kick your ass.
Lex Fridman
And the tricky part of all this too is you might need to frequently pivot, especially in the beginning.
And the tricky part of all this too is you might need to frequently pivot, especially in the beginning.
Mark Cuban
Hopefully not.
Hopefully not.
Lex Fridman
So you think in the beginning, the product you have should be the thing that carries you a long time.
So you think in the beginning, the product you have should be the thing that carries you a long time.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, because that’s your riskiest point in time. And so if you’ve done your homework, which includes going out there and testing product market fit, you should have confidence that you’re going to be able to sell it. Now, if you didn’t do your homework and you go out there and you sell whatever it is and you’ve raised money or whatever, just to pivot, you’ve already shown that you haven’t been able to read the market. And so it’s not that pivots can’t work and always don’t work. They can, but more often than not, they don’t. You pivot for a reason. That’s because you made a huge mistake.
Yeah, because that’s your riskiest point in time. And so if you’ve done your homework, which includes going out there and testing product market fit, you should have confidence that you’re going to be able to sell it. Now, if you didn’t do your homework and you go out there and you sell whatever it is and you’ve raised money or whatever, just to pivot, you’ve already shown that you haven’t been able to read the market. And so it’s not that pivots can’t work and always don’t work. They can, but more often than not, they don’t. You pivot for a reason. That’s because you made a huge mistake.
Lex Fridman
Well, I also mean the micro- pivots, which is iterative development of a-
Well, I also mean the micro- pivots, which is iterative development of a-
Mark Cuban
Oh, yeah, just iterations. Yeah. Entrepreneurship, having any business is just continuous iteration, continuous. Your product, your sales pitch, your advertising, introducing new technology, how do you use AI or not use AI? Where do you use it? What person’s the right person? There’s just a million touch points that you’re always reevaluating in real , early ‘time that you have to be agile and adapt and change.
Oh, yeah, just iterations. Yeah. Entrepreneurship, having any business is just continuous iteration, continuous. Your product, your sales pitch, your advertising, introducing new technology, how do you use AI or not use AI? Where do you use it? What person’s the right person? There’s just a million touch points that you’re always reevaluating in real , early ‘time that you have to be agile and adapt and change.
Lex Fridman
But especially in software, it feels like business model can evolve really quickly, too, like how are you going to make money on this?
But especially in software, it feels like business model can evolve really quickly, too, like how are you going to make money on this?
Mark Cuban
Yeah, software for sure, because anything digital, because it can change in a millisecond.
Yeah, software for sure, because anything digital, because it can change in a millisecond.
How Mark made first billion
Lex Fridman
Speaking of which, how did you make your first billion?
Speaking of which, how did you make your first billion?
Mark Cuban
So my partner, Todd Wagner and I would get together for lunches, and we were at California Pizza Kitchen and Preston Hollow in Dallas, and he was talking about how we could use this new thing called the internet. This is the late ’94, early ’95, to be able to listen to Indiana University basketball games because that’s where we went to school. And he look, when we would listen to games, we would have somebody in Bloomington, Indiana have a speakerphone next to a radio, and then we would have a speakerphone in Dallas and a six-pack or 12 pack of beer, and we’d sit around listening to the game because there was no other way to listen to it. So I was like, okay, my first company, MicroSolutions, I’d written software, done network integration. And so I was comfortable digging into it, and so like, okay, let’s give it a try.
So my partner, Todd Wagner and I would get together for lunches, and we were at California Pizza Kitchen and Preston Hollow in Dallas, and he was talking about how we could use this new thing called the internet. This is the late ’94, early ’95, to be able to listen to Indiana University basketball games because that’s where we went to school. And he look, when we would listen to games, we would have somebody in Bloomington, Indiana have a speakerphone next to a radio, and then we would have a speakerphone in Dallas and a six-pack or 12 pack of beer, and we’d sit around listening to the game because there was no other way to listen to it. So I was like, okay, my first company, MicroSolutions, I’d written software, done network integration. And so I was comfortable digging into it, and so like, okay, let’s give it a try.
So we started this company called AudioNet, and effectively became the first streaming content company on the internet. And we’re like, okay, we’re not sure how we’re going to make this work, but we were able to make it work when we started going to radio stations and TV stations and music labels and everything and evolved. Audionet.com, Which was only audio at the beginning, to broadcast.com in 1998, which was audio and video, and became the largest multimedia site on the internet. Took it public in July of 1998. It had the largest first day jump in the history of the stock market at the time. And then a year later we sold it to Yahoo for $5.7 billion in Yahoo stock, and I owned right around 30% of the company, give or take. And so after taxes, that’s what got me there.
Lex Fridman
Well, there’s a lot of questions there. So the technical challenge of that, you’re making it sound easy, but you wrote code, but still, in the early days of the internet, how do you figure out how to create this kind of product of just audio at first and then video at first?
Well, there’s a lot of questions there. So the technical challenge of that, you’re making it sound easy, but you wrote code, but still, in the early days of the internet, how do you figure out how to create this kind of product of just audio at first and then video at first?
Mark Cuban
A lot of iterations like you talked about. We started in the second bedroom of my house, set up a server. I got an ISDN line, which was a 128K line and set up, downloaded Netscape server, and then started using different file formats that were progressive loading and allowing people to connect to the server and do a progressive download so that the audio, you can listen to the audio while it was downloading onto your PC.
A lot of iterations like you talked about. We started in the second bedroom of my house, set up a server. I got an ISDN line, which was a 128K line and set up, downloaded Netscape server, and then started using different file formats that were progressive loading and allowing people to connect to the server and do a progressive download so that the audio, you can listen to the audio while it was downloading onto your PC.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it was a super choppy. So you’re trying to figure out how to do it.
Yeah, it was a super choppy. So you’re trying to figure out how to do it.
Mark Cuban
Oh yeah, for sure. For sure. It would buffer it. It wasn’t good, but it was a start.
Oh yeah, for sure. For sure. It would buffer it. It wasn’t good, but it was a start.
Lex Fridman
But it was good enough the first
But it was good enough the first
Mark Cuban
Kind. Yeah, because there was no other competition, right? There was nobody else doing it. And so it was like, okay, I can get access to this or this. And then there were some third party software companies, Zing and Progressive Networks and others that took it a little bit further. So we partnered with them and I started going to local radio stations where literally we would set up a server. Right next to it, I had a $49 radio, the highest FM radio that I could find, and we’d take the output of the audio signal from the radio with these two analog cables, plug it into the server, encode it, and make it available from audionet.com. Then I would go on Uunet bulletin boards. I would go on CompuServe, I would go on Prodigy, I would go on AOL, I’d go wherever I could find bodies, and I’d say, okay, we’ve got this radio station KLIF in Dallas.
Kind. Yeah, because there was no other competition, right? There was nobody else doing it. And so it was like, okay, I can get access to this or this. And then there were some third party software companies, Zing and Progressive Networks and others that took it a little bit further. So we partnered with them and I started going to local radio stations where literally we would set up a server. Right next to it, I had a $49 radio, the highest FM radio that I could find, and we’d take the output of the audio signal from the radio with these two analog cables, plug it into the server, encode it, and make it available from audionet.com. Then I would go on Uunet bulletin boards. I would go on CompuServe, I would go on Prodigy, I would go on AOL, I’d go wherever I could find bodies, and I’d say, okay, we’ve got this radio station KLIF in Dallas.
It’s got Dallas sports and Dallas News and politics, and if you’re in an office or you’re outside of Dallas, connect to audionet.com and now you can listen to these things on demand. And that’s how we started. And it started with one radio station, and then it was five, then it was 10, then it was video content, then the laws were different then. So we could literally go out and buy CDs and host them and just let people listen to whatever music. And we went from 10 users a day to a hundred to a thousand, to hundreds of thousands to a million over those next four years.
Lex Fridman
How did you find the users? Is it word of mouth?
How did you find the users? Is it word of mouth?
Mark Cuban
Word of mouth.
Word of mouth.
Lex Fridman
Just word of mouth.
Just word of mouth.
Mark Cuban
Didn’t spend a penny on advertising.
Didn’t spend a penny on advertising.
Lex Fridman
So the thing you were focusing on is getting the radio stations and all that.
So the thing you were focusing on is getting the radio stations and all that.
Mark Cuban
But radio and TV, anything, any content at all.
But radio and TV, anything, any content at all.
Mark Cuban
You
You
Lex Fridman
Pick up the phone, how’d you,
Pick up the phone, how’d you,
Mark Cuban
Wherever I put everything that was public domain, I’d go out and buy a video or a cassette, whatever it was. And this was before the DMs, the digital minimum Copyright Act of 90, whenever it kicked in. So literally anything that was audio we would put online so people could listen to it. And if you think about somebody at work, they didn’t have a radio most likely. And if you did, you couldn’t get reception. Definitely didn’t have a TV, but you had a PC and you had bandwidth available to you and the companies weren’t up on firewalls or anything at that point in time. So our in-office listening during the day just exploded because whoever’s sitting next to you, what are you listening to? And that was the start of it. And then in early 98, we started adding video and just other things, and we had ended up with thousands of servers.
Wherever I put everything that was public domain, I’d go out and buy a video or a cassette, whatever it was. And this was before the DMs, the digital minimum Copyright Act of 90, whenever it kicked in. So literally anything that was audio we would put online so people could listen to it. And if you think about somebody at work, they didn’t have a radio most likely. And if you did, you couldn’t get reception. Definitely didn’t have a TV, but you had a PC and you had bandwidth available to you and the companies weren’t up on firewalls or anything at that point in time. So our in-office listening during the day just exploded because whoever’s sitting next to you, what are you listening to? And that was the start of it. And then in early 98, we started adding video and just other things, and we had ended up with thousands of servers.
There was no cloud back then. And just pulling together all those pieces to make it work. But where we really made our money was by taking that network that we had built and then going to corporations and saying, look, it’s 1996, ’97, ’98. And to communicate with your worldwide employees, what they would do is they would go to an auditorium that had a satellite uplink, and then they would have people go to theaters or ballrooms and hotels that had satellite down links and they would broadcast the product introductions, whatever. And so we said to them, look, you’re paying millions of dollars to reach all your employees when you can do it. Pay us a half a million dollars, and we’ll do it just on their PCs at work. So we did. When Intel announced the P 90 PC, we charged them $2 million or whatever to do that.
When Motorola announced a new phone or a new product, we would charge them. And so we used a consumer side to do a proof of concept for the network, and then we would take that knowledge and go to corporations, and that’s how we made our revenue.
Lex Fridman
And there’s some selling there with the corporations?
And there’s some selling there with the corporations?
Mark Cuban
Yeah, a lot of selling there, but we were saving them so much money, and they were technology companies. They wanted to be perceived as being leading edge. And so it was win-win.
Yeah, a lot of selling there, but we were saving them so much money, and they were technology companies. They wanted to be perceived as being leading edge. And so it was win-win.
Lex Fridman
How much technical savvy was required? You said a bunch of servers. At which point do you get more engineers? How much did you understand could do yourself? And then also, once you can’t do it all yourself. How much technical savvy is required to understand enough to hire the right people to keep building this and innovation?
How much technical savvy was required? You said a bunch of servers. At which point do you get more engineers? How much did you understand could do yourself? And then also, once you can’t do it all yourself. How much technical savvy is required to understand enough to hire the right people to keep building this and innovation?
Mark Cuban
I did all the technology, and then we hired engineer after engineer after engineer to implement it. And so, yeah, from putting together a multicast network to software to just all these different things,
I did all the technology, and then we hired engineer after engineer after engineer to implement it. And so, yeah, from putting together a multicast network to software to just all these different things,
Lex Fridman
Was this a scary thing?
Was this a scary thing?
Mark Cuban
It’s terrifying, right? Because as we were growing, trying to keep up with the scale, and literally, we’re buying off-the-shelf PCs, and then server cards as the technology advanced and hard drives and things would fail, and we would have to… We didn’t have machine learning back then to do an analysis of how to distribute server resources. There was a time when Bill Clinton and all the Monica Lewinsky stuff happened. They released the audio of their interviews of him or something like that. And literally, I knew at that point in time when that was released, everybody at work was going to want to listen to it, right? So we had to take down servers that were doomed.
It’s terrifying, right? Because as we were growing, trying to keep up with the scale, and literally, we’re buying off-the-shelf PCs, and then server cards as the technology advanced and hard drives and things would fail, and we would have to… We didn’t have machine learning back then to do an analysis of how to distribute server resources. There was a time when Bill Clinton and all the Monica Lewinsky stuff happened. They released the audio of their interviews of him or something like that. And literally, I knew at that point in time when that was released, everybody at work was going to want to listen to it, right? So we had to take down servers that were doomed.
Mark Cuban
… Was going to want to listen to it. We had to take down servers that were doing Chicago Cubs baseball and just make all these on-the-fly decisions because we didn’t have the tools to analyze or be predictive. It was all technology-driven and marketing.
… Was going to want to listen to it. We had to take down servers that were doing Chicago Cubs baseball and just make all these on-the-fly decisions because we didn’t have the tools to analyze or be predictive. It was all technology-driven and marketing.
Lex Fridman
The acquisition by Yahoo. Can you tell the story of that, but also in the broader context of this internet bubble? This is a fascinating part of human history.
The acquisition by Yahoo. Can you tell the story of that, but also in the broader context of this internet bubble? This is a fascinating part of human history.
Mark Cuban
On the acquisition side, we were the largest media site on the internet, and it wasn’t close. There was nobody close. We were YouTube and relatively speaking, we would be 10X YouTube relative to the competition because there was nobody there. It became obvious to Yahoo, AOL, and others that they needed a multimedia component. We had the infrastructure, sales, all that stuff.
On the acquisition side, we were the largest media site on the internet, and it wasn’t close. There was nobody close. We were YouTube and relatively speaking, we would be 10X YouTube relative to the competition because there was nobody there. It became obvious to Yahoo, AOL, and others that they needed a multimedia component. We had the infrastructure, sales, all that stuff.
Yahoo, when we went public in ’98 or right before, I think it was, they made an investment of $2 million, which gave us a connection to them. After we went public, they decided they needed to have multimedia, so in April of ’99, we made a deal, and then July of 2000 is when it closed.
Lex Fridman
Can you explain to me the trickiness of what you did after that?
Can you explain to me the trickiness of what you did after that?
Mark Cuban
The collar?
The collar?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Mark Cuban
Okay. When we sold to Yahoo, we sold for $5.7 billion in stock, not cash. After Micro Solutions, when I sold that, I took that money and initially I told my broker I wanted to invest like a 60-year-old man because I wanted to protect it, but then he started asking me all kinds of questions about all these technologies that I understood, like networks I had installed. We had become one of the top 20, let’s say, systems integrators in the country. At one point in time, we were the largest IBM token ring installer in the country. It was crazy. Banyan, Blast from the Past.
Okay. When we sold to Yahoo, we sold for $5.7 billion in stock, not cash. After Micro Solutions, when I sold that, I took that money and initially I told my broker I wanted to invest like a 60-year-old man because I wanted to protect it, but then he started asking me all kinds of questions about all these technologies that I understood, like networks I had installed. We had become one of the top 20, let’s say, systems integrators in the country. At one point in time, we were the largest IBM token ring installer in the country. It was crazy. Banyan, Blast from the Past.
Anyway, these Wall Street bankers or analysts rather, that were the big analysts of the time would call me up because they would ask my broker, “What does he know about this product, this product?” I knew them all, what was working and not working. The ones that worked, I say that it’s working and they say something, the stock would go up $20. My broker was like, “You know this better than they do. You need to invest.”
I started buying and selling stocks, and this was in 1990 and was just killing it. I was making 80, 90, 100% a year over those next four years to the point where guy came in and asked to use my trading history to start a hedge fund, which we did. I sold within nine months, it was great. The point being as it goes forward, so when we sold to Yahoo, I already had a lot of experience trading stocks, and I had seen different bubbles come and go. The bubble for PC manufacturers, a bubble for networking manufacturers, they went up, up, up, up, up, and then they came straight down after the hype where somebody just leapfrogged.
When we sold to Yahoo, I was like I’ve got a B next to my name. That’s all I need, or all I want. I don’t want to be greedy. I’d seen this story before where stocks get really frothy and go straight down. I knew that because all of what I had was in stock, I needed to find a way to collar it and protect it. Understanding stocks and trading and options and all that, my broker and I, we went and shorted an index that had Yahoo in it.
The law at the time was you couldn’t short any indexes that had more than 5% of that stock in it, of the Yahoo stock. I took pretty much $20 million dollars, everything I had at the time, and I shorted the index.
Lex Fridman
This is fascinating, by the way, because based on your estimation that this is a bubble.
This is fascinating, by the way, because based on your estimation that this is a bubble.
Mark Cuban
Or just mine not wanting to be greedy.
Or just mine not wanting to be greedy.
Lex Fridman
Sure. The foundation of this kind of thinking is you don’t want to be greedy.
Sure. The foundation of this kind of thinking is you don’t want to be greedy.
Mark Cuban
Yeah. How much money do I need? Where other people were saying, oh, I think you can go up higher, higher, higher. I went on CNBC and I told them what I had done, and Yahoo stock had gone up significantly from the time I had collared. One of the guys, Joe Kernan was on there, “Don’t you feel stupid now that Yahoo stock has gone up X% more?” I’m like, “Yeah, I feel real stupid sitting on my jet.”
Yeah. How much money do I need? Where other people were saying, oh, I think you can go up higher, higher, higher. I went on CNBC and I told them what I had done, and Yahoo stock had gone up significantly from the time I had collared. One of the guys, Joe Kernan was on there, “Don’t you feel stupid now that Yahoo stock has gone up X% more?” I’m like, “Yeah, I feel real stupid sitting on my jet.”
Lex Fridman
There is some fundamental way in which bubbles are based on this greed.
There is some fundamental way in which bubbles are based on this greed.
Mark Cuban
For sure, and I’d seen it before, like I just said. What I did was we put together a collar where I sold calls and bought puts, and as it turned out, when the market just cratered, I was protected. Over the next two, three years, whatever it was, it converted to cash, paid my taxes, etc, but it protected me. As it turns out, it was called one of the top 10 trades of all time.
For sure, and I’d seen it before, like I just said. What I did was we put together a collar where I sold calls and bought puts, and as it turned out, when the market just cratered, I was protected. Over the next two, three years, whatever it was, it converted to cash, paid my taxes, etc, but it protected me. As it turns out, it was called one of the top 10 trades of all time.
What was even more interesting out of that period, my broker at that time was at Goldman Sachs, and I had asked him to see if there was a way to trade the VIX, the volatility index, and there wasn’t. One of the people that Goldman that we were working with to try to create this actually left Goldman and created indexes that allowed you to trade the VIX.
Lex Fridman
It’s not trivial to understand that it’s a bubble. You’re lessening your insight into all this by saying you just didn’t want to be greedy, but you still have to see that it’s a bubble.
It’s not trivial to understand that it’s a bubble. You’re lessening your insight into all this by saying you just didn’t want to be greedy, but you still have to see that it’s a bubble.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, obviously if I thought it was going to keep on going up and there was intrinsic value there, I would’ve stayed in it. It wasn’t so much Yahoo, it was just the entire industry. We’re looking at the magic seven or whatever it is stocks now and people were asking is it in a bubble? I would get into cabs and people would just start talking about internet stocks.
Yeah, obviously if I thought it was going to keep on going up and there was intrinsic value there, I would’ve stayed in it. It wasn’t so much Yahoo, it was just the entire industry. We’re looking at the magic seven or whatever it is stocks now and people were asking is it in a bubble? I would get into cabs and people would just start talking about internet stocks.
There were people creating companies with just a website and going public. That’s a bubble where there’s no intrinsic value at all. People aren’t even trying to make operating cap profits, they’re just trying to leverage the frothiness of the stock market, that’s a bubble. You don’t see that right now. You don’t see any IPOs right now for that matter, so I don’t think we’re in a bubble now, but back then, yes, I thought we were in a bubble, but that wasn’t really the motivating factor.
Lex Fridman
Do you think it’s possible we’re in a bit of an AI bubble right now?
Do you think it’s possible we’re in a bit of an AI bubble right now?
Mark Cuban
No, because we’re not seeing funky AI companies just go public. If all of a sudden we see a rush of companies who are skins on other people’s models or just creating models to create models that are going public, then yeah, that’s probably the start of a bubble. That said, my fourteen-year-old was bragging about buying NVIDIA with me in his Robinhood account. He tells me the order, I place it, and he was like, “Oh, yeah, it’s going up, up, up.” I’m like yeah, we’re not quite there yet, but that’s one thing to pay attention to.
No, because we’re not seeing funky AI companies just go public. If all of a sudden we see a rush of companies who are skins on other people’s models or just creating models to create models that are going public, then yeah, that’s probably the start of a bubble. That said, my fourteen-year-old was bragging about buying NVIDIA with me in his Robinhood account. He tells me the order, I place it, and he was like, “Oh, yeah, it’s going up, up, up.” I’m like yeah, we’re not quite there yet, but that’s one thing to pay attention to.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, we’re flirting with it. You said that becoming a billionaire requires luck. Can you explain?
Yeah, we’re flirting with it. You said that becoming a billionaire requires luck. Can you explain?
Mark Cuban
Yeah. There’s no business plan where you can just start it and say yeah, I’m definitely going to be a billionaire. If I had to start all over, could I start a company that made me a millionaire? Yeah, because I know how to sell and I know technology, and I’ve learned enough over the years to do that. Could I make $10 million? Probably. $100 million? I hope so. But $1 billion, just something good has got to happen.
Yeah. There’s no business plan where you can just start it and say yeah, I’m definitely going to be a billionaire. If I had to start all over, could I start a company that made me a millionaire? Yeah, because I know how to sell and I know technology, and I’ve learned enough over the years to do that. Could I make $10 million? Probably. $100 million? I hope so. But $1 billion, just something good has got to happen.
Lex Fridman
Timing.
Timing.
Mark Cuban
Timing. Internet stock market was going nuts when we started, and that certainly I couldn’t predict or control. It’s like AI right now, AI’s been around a long, long, long, long time. The NVIDIA GPUs, you couldn’t predict that now’s the time that they were going to get to that cost-effectiveness where you could create models and train them and although it’s expensive, it’s still doable. We had ASICs for custom applications and we had CPUs that were leading the way, but GPUs were more for gaming and then crypto mining, and then all of a sudden they were the foundation for AI models.
Timing. Internet stock market was going nuts when we started, and that certainly I couldn’t predict or control. It’s like AI right now, AI’s been around a long, long, long, long time. The NVIDIA GPUs, you couldn’t predict that now’s the time that they were going to get to that cost-effectiveness where you could create models and train them and although it’s expensive, it’s still doable. We had ASICs for custom applications and we had CPUs that were leading the way, but GPUs were more for gaming and then crypto mining, and then all of a sudden they were the foundation for AI models.
Lex Fridman
I think luck being essential to becoming a billionaire is a beautiful way to see life in general. First of all, I personally think that everything good that’s ever happened to me is because of luck. I think that’s just a good way of being. It’s like you’re grateful.
I think luck being essential to becoming a billionaire is a beautiful way to see life in general. First of all, I personally think that everything good that’s ever happened to me is because of luck. I think that’s just a good way of being. It’s like you’re grateful.
That said, there’s some examples of people that you’re like, they seem to have gotten lucky a lot. We’ll mention Jeff Bezos. It seems like he did a lot of really interesting, powerful decisions for many years with Amazon to make it successful.
Mark Cuban
But he was really able to raise money, a lot of money, and people were really dismissive of him because they weren’t profitable and we were in an environment where it was possible to raise [inaudible 00:43:16]-
But he was really able to raise money, a lot of money, and people were really dismissive of him because they weren’t profitable and we were in an environment where it was possible to raise [inaudible 00:43:16]-
Lex Fridman
It was possible to raise that money. What about somebody you get sometimes feisty with on the internet, Elon. Could even look at Zuck, and Bill Gates, and Warren Buffett.
It was possible to raise that money. What about somebody you get sometimes feisty with on the internet, Elon. Could even look at Zuck, and Bill Gates, and Warren Buffett.
Mark Cuban
Look, Zuck was just trying to get laid and it took off and he wrote some good stuff.
Look, Zuck was just trying to get laid and it took off and he wrote some good stuff.
Lex Fridman
Aren’t we all? Isn’t that the foundation of human civilization?
Aren’t we all? Isn’t that the foundation of human civilization?
Mark Cuban
At some level, right? More power to them, you can’t take anything away from them. Snapchat, same thing, took off. Apps didn’t take off in 2007 when the iPhone came out, apps took off in 2011, 2012, and if you were there with the right app at the right time.
At some level, right? More power to them, you can’t take anything away from them. Snapchat, same thing, took off. Apps didn’t take off in 2007 when the iPhone came out, apps took off in 2011, 2012, and if you were there with the right app at the right time.
Even Facebook in 2004, the bubble had burst and the price for computers had fallen enough. And kids in school all needed computers or laptops. If he had tried to do something like that five years earlier… He was too young, but five years earlier or five years later, or Friendster might’ve been the ultimate or MySpace,
Lex Fridman
Friendster, I remember Friendster.
Friendster, I remember Friendster.
Mark Cuban
Or MySpace. I had a MySpace account, and that was before Facebook.
Or MySpace. I had a MySpace account, and that was before Facebook.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, the timing’s important, but there’s the details of how the product is built, the fundamentals of the product.
Yeah, the timing’s important, but there’s the details of how the product is built, the fundamentals of the product.
Mark Cuban
But that’s what gets you. When the opportunity is there, that’s what allows you to take advantage of that opportunity and the kismet of it all because it wasn’t like any of the people I mentioned, there weren’t others trying the same thing. You had to be able to see it. You had to be able to visualize it and put together a plan of some sort, or at least have a path, and then you had to execute on it and do all those things at the same time and have the money available to you because it wasn’t like whether it was Google or Facebook, they raised a shitload of money. It wasn’t bootstrapping it that got them there.
But that’s what gets you. When the opportunity is there, that’s what allows you to take advantage of that opportunity and the kismet of it all because it wasn’t like any of the people I mentioned, there weren’t others trying the same thing. You had to be able to see it. You had to be able to visualize it and put together a plan of some sort, or at least have a path, and then you had to execute on it and do all those things at the same time and have the money available to you because it wasn’t like whether it was Google or Facebook, they raised a shitload of money. It wasn’t bootstrapping it that got them there.
Lex Fridman
Raising money is not just about sales, it’s about the general feeling of the people with money at that time.
Raising money is not just about sales, it’s about the general feeling of the people with money at that time.
Mark Cuban
And proximity.
And proximity.
Lex Fridman
Oh, yeah. Sure.
Oh, yeah. Sure.
Mark Cuban
If Zuck wasn’t at Harvard and he was at Miami of Ohio University or he was at Richland Community College, same idea, same person, same execution, and nothing.
If Zuck wasn’t at Harvard and he was at Miami of Ohio University or he was at Richland Community College, same idea, same person, same execution, and nothing.
Lex Fridman
I believe in the power of individuals to realize their potential no matter where they come from.
I believe in the power of individuals to realize their potential no matter where they come from.
Mark Cuban
I agree 100% with that.
I agree 100% with that.
Lex Fridman
But luck is required.
But luck is required.
Mark Cuban
The only delta is scale. We’re not all blessed with the access to the tools you need to hit that grand slam.
The only delta is scale. We’re not all blessed with the access to the tools you need to hit that grand slam.
Lex Fridman
But then also, billion is not the only measure of success, right?
But then also, billion is not the only measure of success, right?
Mark Cuban
Absolutely not. Right. Everybody defines the success in their own way.
Absolutely not. Right. Everybody defines the success in their own way.
Lex Fridman
How do you define success, Mark Cuban?
How do you define success, Mark Cuban?
Mark Cuban
Waking up every day with a smile, excited about the day. People always say when you get that kind of money, does it make you happy? My answer always is if you are happy when you are broke, you’re going to be really, really, really happy when you’re rich.
Waking up every day with a smile, excited about the day. People always say when you get that kind of money, does it make you happy? My answer always is if you are happy when you are broke, you’re going to be really, really, really happy when you’re rich.
Lex Fridman
But you got to work on being happy when you’re broke, I guess.
But you got to work on being happy when you’re broke, I guess.
Mark Cuban
You’re just being happy. If you were miserable in your job before, there’s a good chance you’re still going to be miserable if that’s just who you are.
You’re just being happy. If you were miserable in your job before, there’s a good chance you’re still going to be miserable if that’s just who you are.
Lex Fridman
That’s a pretty good definition of success, by the way.
That’s a pretty good definition of success, by the way.
Mark Cuban
Thank you.
Thank you.
Lex Fridman
How do you reach that success by way of advice to people?
How do you reach that success by way of advice to people?
Mark Cuban
We talked about my dad, my parents. I never looked at my dad and said okay, you’re not successful. He busted his ass and when he came home, we enjoyed our time together. There was nothing at any point in time where I felt like this is miserable, we’re awful, we don’t have this, we don’t have that. We celebrated the things we did have and never knew about the things we didn’t have. I think you have to be able to find your way to whatever it is that puts a smile on your face every day. Some people can do it, and some people can’t.
We talked about my dad, my parents. I never looked at my dad and said okay, you’re not successful. He busted his ass and when he came home, we enjoyed our time together. There was nothing at any point in time where I felt like this is miserable, we’re awful, we don’t have this, we don’t have that. We celebrated the things we did have and never knew about the things we didn’t have. I think you have to be able to find your way to whatever it is that puts a smile on your face every day. Some people can do it, and some people can’t.
Lex Fridman
It’s not always about the smile on the outside, it could be a smile on the inside.
It’s not always about the smile on the outside, it could be a smile on the inside.
Mark Cuban
Whatever it is, whatever makes you feel good.
Whatever it is, whatever makes you feel good.
Lex Fridman
Even the struggle, like with your dad, the really, really hard work can be a fulfilling experience because the struggle leading up to then seeing your kids and seeing your family.
Even the struggle, like with your dad, the really, really hard work can be a fulfilling experience because the struggle leading up to then seeing your kids and seeing your family.
Mark Cuban
Exactly right. That was my dad’s grand slam, seeing three kids go to college, be successful, be able to spend time with them. That was the other thing he really made me realize is the most valuable asset isn’t the money, it’s your time. That’s why from a young age, I wanted to retire because I wanted to experience everything that I possibly could in this life. He got joy from us, I get joy from my kids, and that’s the most special thing that you ever can have.
Exactly right. That was my dad’s grand slam, seeing three kids go to college, be successful, be able to spend time with them. That was the other thing he really made me realize is the most valuable asset isn’t the money, it’s your time. That’s why from a young age, I wanted to retire because I wanted to experience everything that I possibly could in this life. He got joy from us, I get joy from my kids, and that’s the most special thing that you ever can have.
Lex Fridman
Beautifully said. You have made some mistakes in your life?
Beautifully said. You have made some mistakes in your life?
Mark Cuban
Yeah, a lot of them.
Yeah, a lot of them.
Lex Fridman
One of the bigger ones on the financial side we could say is Uber.
One of the bigger ones on the financial side we could say is Uber.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, we call that not doing something. Yeah, it wasn’t a mistake, it was just… It was a mistake.
Yeah, we call that not doing something. Yeah, it wasn’t a mistake, it was just… It was a mistake.
Lex Fridman
I like how you tried to…
I like how you tried to…
Mark Cuban
I always try to look at mistakes at things you did that didn’t turn out as opposed to things you didn’t do, the negative.
I always try to look at mistakes at things you did that didn’t turn out as opposed to things you didn’t do, the negative.
Lex Fridman
Can you tell the story of that? And maybe it’s just interesting because it is illustrative how to know when a thing is going to be big and not, what are the fundamentals of it, and how to take the risk and all this kind of stuff.
Can you tell the story of that? And maybe it’s just interesting because it is illustrative how to know when a thing is going to be big and not, what are the fundamentals of it, and how to take the risk and all this kind of stuff.
Mark Cuban
The backstory of that is Bill Gurley came to me and said, “Mark, there’s this guy, Travis, that has this company, Red Swoosh, which is a peer-to-peer networking company that I think you can help.” I invested and would spend a lot of time with Travis.
The backstory of that is Bill Gurley came to me and said, “Mark, there’s this guy, Travis, that has this company, Red Swoosh, which is a peer-to-peer networking company that I think you can help.” I invested and would spend a lot of time with Travis.
It’s funny because back then, that was 2006, I was an investor at Box.net with Aaron Levy and… Oh, there was one other company, but there were three of them where there’d be emails where I’d introduce them and we’d all talk in these emails and they’d all gone to have astronomical success.
Red Swoosh had its issues. I always look at peer-to-peer as stealing bandwidth from the internet providers when bandwidth was a scarce commodity. What Travis did with that though, was great. He convinced gaming companies who wanted to do downloads of the clients for those games to use his peer-to-peer on Red Swoosh. He busted his ass, and I think he sold it for $18 million, so he did well.
So it was natural for him to come to me, and I still have the emails and ask me about Uber Cab. I thought okay, this is a great idea. I really, really like it. He showed me his budgets, and I think they were raising money at $10 million or $15 million or whatever. I’m like, “Your biggest challenge is going to be you’re going to have to fight all the incumbent taxi commissions. They’re going to want to put you out of business. That’s going to be a challenge and I think you don’t have enough money designated for marketing to get all that done.” I said, “I’d invest, but not quite at that valuation.” Never came back to me.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, there’s some lessons there connected to what you’re doing now we’ll talk about [inaudible 00:50:32], it’s looking at an industry that seems like there’s a lot of complexity involved, but it’s hungry for revolution and the cabs are that.
Yeah, there’s some lessons there connected to what you’re doing now we’ll talk about [inaudible 00:50:32], it’s looking at an industry that seems like there’s a lot of complexity involved, but it’s hungry for revolution and the cabs are that.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, for sure. They were dominated by an insulated few, they were not very transparent, you didn’t know the intricacies, they were very politically driven, an old boy insensuous network. I told him, “Travis, the best thing about you is you’ll run through walls and break down barriers. The bad thing about you is you’ll run through walls even if you don’t have to.”
Yeah, for sure. They were dominated by an insulated few, they were not very transparent, you didn’t know the intricacies, they were very politically driven, an old boy insensuous network. I told him, “Travis, the best thing about you is you’ll run through walls and break down barriers. The bad thing about you is you’ll run through walls even if you don’t have to.”
Lex Fridman
There you have to see, is it possible to raise enough money? Is it possible to do all this? Is it possible to break through? It’s a fascinating success story with Uber.
There you have to see, is it possible to raise enough money? Is it possible to do all this? Is it possible to break through? It’s a fascinating success story with Uber.
Mark Cuban
I think he tried to go too big. He had too big an ambition, which cost him in the end, not financially and personally, but just in terms of being able to stick it out with them, but that’s what makes him a great entrepreneur.
I think he tried to go too big. He had too big an ambition, which cost him in the end, not financially and personally, but just in terms of being able to stick it out with them, but that’s what makes him a great entrepreneur.
Lex Fridman
It’s a fascinating success story. You have certain companies like Airbnb just go into this thing that we take completely for granted.
It’s a fascinating success story. You have certain companies like Airbnb just go into this thing that we take completely for granted.
Mark Cuban
And change it all.
And change it all.
Lex Fridman
Just change it all.
Just change it all.
Mark Cuban
Linda Johnson, who worked as our general counsel at broadcast.com, was Brian’s GC and chief operating officer. They had a smart, smart team.
Linda Johnson, who worked as our general counsel at broadcast.com, was Brian’s GC and chief operating officer. They had a smart, smart team.
Lex Fridman
They believed in it. It’s a beautiful story because you’re like all right, all the things that annoy you about this world, they’re an inefficient, and it just seemed like a pain in the ass-
They believed in it. It’s a beautiful story because you’re like all right, all the things that annoy you about this world, they’re an inefficient, and it just seemed like a pain in the ass-
Mark Cuban
See, I probably would’ve said no like a lot of people did to Airbnb because I’m like I don’t want people sleeping in my bed.
See, I probably would’ve said no like a lot of people did to Airbnb because I’m like I don’t want people sleeping in my bed.
Lex Fridman
I would’ve too. I was like this is not going to work. I’ve done couchsurfing and stuff and it was always… It didn’t seem right. It didn’t seem like you could do this at a large scale.
I would’ve too. I was like this is not going to work. I’ve done couchsurfing and stuff and it was always… It didn’t seem right. It didn’t seem like you could do this at a large scale.
Mark Cuban
To monetize it. Yeah, but he did more power to him.
To monetize it. Yeah, but he did more power to him.
Dallas Mavericks
Lex Fridman
In 2000, I think January, you purchased a majority stake in the NBA team, Dallas Mavericks for $285 million. At this point, maybe you can correct me, but it was one of the worst performing teams in franchise history.
In 2000, I think January, you purchased a majority stake in the NBA team, Dallas Mavericks for $285 million. At this point, maybe you can correct me, but it was one of the worst performing teams in franchise history.
Mark Cuban
It’s true.
It’s true.
Lex Fridman
How did you help turn it around?
How did you help turn it around?
Mark Cuban
I had this big, tall guy named Dirk Nowitzki, and I let him be Dirk Nowitzki, and I got out of the way. I think more than anything else, there was the turnaround on the business side, and then there was the turnaround on the basketball side. On the basketball side, I just went in there, immediately said whatever it takes to win, that’s what we’re going to do. Back then, they had three or four coaches that were responsible for everything and I was like okay, we spend more money training people on PC software than we do developing the most important assets of the business.
I had this big, tall guy named Dirk Nowitzki, and I let him be Dirk Nowitzki, and I got out of the way. I think more than anything else, there was the turnaround on the business side, and then there was the turnaround on the basketball side. On the basketball side, I just went in there, immediately said whatever it takes to win, that’s what we’re going to do. Back then, they had three or four coaches that were responsible for everything and I was like okay, we spend more money training people on PC software than we do developing the most important assets of the business.
I made the decision to go out there and hire 15 different development coaches, one for each player. Everybody thought I was just insane, but it sent the message that we were going to do whatever it took to win. Once the guys believed that winning was the goal as opposed to just making money, attitudes change, efforts went up, and the rest is history.
Lex Fridman
The assets of the business here are the players.
The assets of the business here are the players.
Mark Cuban
The players.
The players.
Lex Fridman
The players.
The players.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, for sure. On the business side, the first question I asked myself is what business are we in? I really didn’t know the answer immediately, but within the first few months, it was obvious that the entire NBA thought we were in the business of basketball. We were not, we were in the experience business.
Yeah, for sure. On the business side, the first question I asked myself is what business are we in? I really didn’t know the answer immediately, but within the first few months, it was obvious that the entire NBA thought we were in the business of basketball. We were not, we were in the experience business.
When you think about sporting events that you’ve been to, you don’t remember the score, you don’t remember the home runs or the dunks, you remember who you were with, and you remember why you went. It was my first date with a girl who’s now my wife or I went with my buddies and he threw up on the person in front of us. My dad took me, my aunt, my uncle took me. Those are the experiences you remember.
Once I conveyed to our people that this is what we were selling, that what happened in the arena off the court was just as important as what happened on the court, if not more so because if mom or dad are bringing the 10-year-old, you have to keep them occupied because they have short attention spans.
I would get into fights with NBA, put aside the refs, but getting in fights in the NBA, I would say NBA, nothing but attorneys, because they had no marketing skills whatsoever. To their credit, they realized that was a problem and started bringing in better and better marketing people.
Lex Fridman
Part of the selling is you’re selling the team, selling the sport, selling the people, the idea, all of it.
Part of the selling is you’re selling the team, selling the sport, selling the people, the idea, all of it.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, the experience. Have you ever been to an NBA game?
Yeah, the experience. Have you ever been to an NBA game?
Lex Fridman
Miami Heat.
Miami Heat.
Mark Cuban
Do you remember walking into the arena and you feel the energy? That’s what makes it special.
Do you remember walking into the arena and you feel the energy? That’s what makes it special.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, the energy is everything. Especially playoff games.
Yeah, the energy is everything. Especially playoff games.
Mark Cuban
Right, for sure. Even a regular season game, even against the worst team, that’s where we get… Because the tickets tend to be a little bit cheaper on the resale market, that’s where parents will bring their kids. You hear kids screaming the entire game, and the parents are thrilled to death, they got to do something with their kids. The kids are thrilled to death because they got to see basketball, an NBA game, and scream at the top of their lungs.
Right, for sure. Even a regular season game, even against the worst team, that’s where we get… Because the tickets tend to be a little bit cheaper on the resale market, that’s where parents will bring their kids. You hear kids screaming the entire game, and the parents are thrilled to death, they got to do something with their kids. The kids are thrilled to death because they got to see basketball, an NBA game, and scream at the top of their lungs.
If it turns out to be a close game, and that ball’s in the air, and if it goes in, everybody’s hugging and high-fiving people you’ve never seen before in your life, and if it misses, you’re commiserating with people you’ve never seen. That’s such a unique experience that’s unique to sports. We never sold that and that’s exactly what we started.
Lex Fridman
I have to say, just going to that game turned me around on basketball because I’m more of a football guy. Basketball wasn’t like the main sport. I was like oh, wow, okay.
I have to say, just going to that game turned me around on basketball because I’m more of a football guy. Basketball wasn’t like the main sport. I was like oh, wow, okay.
Mark Cuban
It’s fun. It’s different. The energy in a stadium is completely different than the energy and arena. In the stadium, particularly if it doesn’t have a roof, it’s hard to bottle that energy. You feel it and you see… I’m from Pittsburgh, so there’s the terrible towels and people screaming defense and everything at Steelers games, but in an arena, the energy level is just indescribable.
It’s fun. It’s different. The energy in a stadium is completely different than the energy and arena. In the stadium, particularly if it doesn’t have a roof, it’s hard to bottle that energy. You feel it and you see… I’m from Pittsburgh, so there’s the terrible towels and people screaming defense and everything at Steelers games, but in an arena, the energy level is just indescribable.
Lex Fridman
How much of it is the selling that tickets in person, but also versus what you see on TV? When you’re owning a team, do you get any of the cut for the what’s shown on TV?
How much of it is the selling that tickets in person, but also versus what you see on TV? When you’re owning a team, do you get any of the cut for the what’s shown on TV?
Mark Cuban
Yeah. There’s a TV deal that’s done with either a local TV broadcaster and we get all of that, or a network broadcaster like ABC, ESPN, T&T, whatever, we get one 30th of that.
Yeah. There’s a TV deal that’s done with either a local TV broadcaster and we get all of that, or a network broadcaster like ABC, ESPN, T&T, whatever, we get one 30th of that.
Lex Fridman
What role does the TV play in turning a team around?
What role does the TV play in turning a team around?
Mark Cuban
It keeps fans connected. Look, when the team is doing really well, it’s easy. There’s more viewers, everybody’s more excited. When you’re not, there’s still going to be hardcore fans and general fans and kids that like to watch the game.
It keeps fans connected. Look, when the team is doing really well, it’s easy. There’s more viewers, everybody’s more excited. When you’re not, there’s still going to be hardcore fans and general fans and kids that like to watch the game.
Lex Fridman
What about the personality of the people in the stands? Clearly, you’re part of the legend of the team because you’re literally there going wild.
What about the personality of the people in the stands? Clearly, you’re part of the legend of the team because you’re literally there going wild.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, screaming the whole game. It’s funny, the way I am here is how I am 24 hours a day, unless there’s a Mavs game. For whatever reason, that’s where I let out all that stress and frustration. The fan’s the sixth man. We need fans to bring that energy and amplifying that as much as we can is important.
Yeah, screaming the whole game. It’s funny, the way I am here is how I am 24 hours a day, unless there’s a Mavs game. For whatever reason, that’s where I let out all that stress and frustration. The fan’s the sixth man. We need fans to bring that energy and amplifying that as much as we can is important.
DEI debate
Lex Fridman
You’ve had a beef recently on Twitter on X with Elon over DEI programs. What to you is the essence of the disagreement there?
You’ve had a beef recently on Twitter on X with Elon over DEI programs. What to you is the essence of the disagreement there?
Mark Cuban
I wouldn’t call it a beef.
I wouldn’t call it a beef.
Lex Fridman
It’s a bit of fun?
It’s a bit of fun?
Mark Cuban
Yeah, it’s fun for me. It’s his platform, he gets to run it any way he please. He pays for that right, and so I have total respect for whatever choices he makes even if I don’t agree with them, but because it’s his platform, people are less likely to disagree with him, particularly somebody who’s got a platform themselves.
Yeah, it’s fun for me. It’s his platform, he gets to run it any way he please. He pays for that right, and so I have total respect for whatever choices he makes even if I don’t agree with them, but because it’s his platform, people are less likely to disagree with him, particularly somebody who’s got a platform themselves.
When we start talking about DEI and it’s just de facto racist and this stuff, stuff that I just think is nonsense. I have no problem sharing my opinion. If he disagrees, okay, he can disagree, I don’t care. It’s fun to engage, but he doesn’t really engage, he just comes back with snark comments, which is his choice.
Lex Fridman
In your comments, you do a bit of snark too.
In your comments, you do a bit of snark too.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, a little bit.
Yeah, a little bit.
Lex Fridman
You’re pretty, let’s say, rigorous in your response. There is some exchange of ideas, there’s some snark, there’s some fun, all that kind of stuff. You do voice the opinion that represents a large number of people and that’s great. That’s really beautiful. But just lingering on the topic, what to you is the good and the bad of DEI programs?
You’re pretty, let’s say, rigorous in your response. There is some exchange of ideas, there’s some snark, there’s some fun, all that kind of stuff. You do voice the opinion that represents a large number of people and that’s great. That’s really beautiful. But just lingering on the topic, what to you is the good and the bad of DEI programs?
Mark Cuban
Really simple, D is diversity. That means you just expand your pool of potential applicants to people who you might not otherwise have access to. To look where you didn’t look before, to look where other people aren’t looking for quality employees. That’s simple.
Really simple, D is diversity. That means you just expand your pool of potential applicants to people who you might not otherwise have access to. To look where you didn’t look before, to look where other people aren’t looking for quality employees. That’s simple.
The E in equity means when you hire somebody, you put them in a position to succeed. The I, inclusion, is when you’ve hired somebody and they may not be typical, if you will, you show them some love and give them the support they need so they can do their job as best they can and feel comfortable and confident going to work. It’s that simple.
Lex Fridman
That’s a beautiful ideal. When it’s implemented, implemented poorly perhaps, or in a way that doesn’t reach that ideal, do you see, maybe when it’s quota based, do you see that it can result in essentially racism towards Asian people and white people, for example?
That’s a beautiful ideal. When it’s implemented, implemented poorly perhaps, or in a way that doesn’t reach that ideal, do you see, maybe when it’s quota based, do you see that it can result in essentially racism towards Asian people and white people, for example?
Mark Cuban
There’s a lot to unpack there. First, you can’t do quotas. There are illegal unless you’re… And I’m not the lawyer on this subject, but unless you’re trying to repair something that’s happened in the past, some discrimination that’s happened in the past. It’s not quota-based, and I think that’s really just a straw man that people put out there.
There’s a lot to unpack there. First, you can’t do quotas. There are illegal unless you’re… And I’m not the lawyer on this subject, but unless you’re trying to repair something that’s happened in the past, some discrimination that’s happened in the past. It’s not quota-based, and I think that’s really just a straw man that people put out there.
Now, does that mean that there aren’t DEI programs that are implemented poorly? Of course not. Everything that’s implemented poorly in one company to another. Sales, marketing, human resources, you can pick any element of business and find companies that implement it poorly, but that’s the beauty of capitalism in a free market or mostly free market where if you make these choices and they are the wrong choices, you’re going to lose your best people. You’re not going to be able to hire the best people. You’re not going to execute on your business plans in the way that we discussed, regardless of the size of the company.
It also, I think, depends on where you’re having the discussion. When I’m in a different group of people off of X, the feedback’s completely different. To your question of reverse racism, yes, it happens because people are people. There’s no human being that is 100% objective. It’s also, there’s very, very, very few jobs that can be determined on a purely quantitative basis.
How do you tell one janitor from the other, who’s the best? How do you tell one salesperson that you’re hiring versus another you’re hiring because they haven’t sold your product yet, so you don’t know? We talked earlier about firing people because you made mistakes.
Yes, there’s discrimination against any group, white, Asian, black, green, orange, whatever it may be, but I truly believe that there’s far more discrimination against people of color than there are people who are white. I think it’s become a straw man, that reverse discrimination because of DEI is prevalent or near ubiquitous.
Lex Fridman
Much of American history was defined by intense radical racism and sexism. But in the recent years, there was a correction and I think the nature of the criticism is that there’s an overcorrection where DEI programs at universities and companies, when they’re not doing their job well, are often hard to criticize because when you criticize them within the company or so on, they have a very strong immune system. If you criticize a DEI program, it seems like it’s very easy to be called racist, and if you’re called racist or sexist, that’s a sticky label.
Much of American history was defined by intense radical racism and sexism. But in the recent years, there was a correction and I think the nature of the criticism is that there’s an overcorrection where DEI programs at universities and companies, when they’re not doing their job well, are often hard to criticize because when you criticize them within the company or so on, they have a very strong immune system. If you criticize a DEI program, it seems like it’s very easy to be called racist, and if you’re called racist or sexist, that’s a sticky label.
Mark Cuban
You’re getting into the culture of organizations and leadership within organizations, and accepting any type of criticism, put aside DEI. When I criticized the referees in the MVA, I got fined. That was their option. I knew what I was getting into, not that they’re completely analogous, but it’s cause and effect.
You’re getting into the culture of organizations and leadership within organizations, and accepting any type of criticism, put aside DEI. When I criticized the referees in the MVA, I got fined. That was their option. I knew what I was getting into, not that they’re completely analogous, but it’s cause and effect.
If I’m in a major company and I’m publicly criticizing or even internally criticizing a sales plan or a product, our product sucks. There was a Google engineer that got fired for saying Google had AGI, and nobody believed they did and they knew that created problems. It wasn’t DEI related, but it was saying something publicly that was, in the CEO’s eyes, to the detriment of the company.
I think those are all analogous. If you’re trying to accomplish something within an organization because you think there’s a problem and there’s people speaking out saying look, we’re getting it wrong, I think I’m a victim of all this, and the company… Then leadership has got to make a decision. Do they agree or not agree? Are they right or are they wrong? Is it positive or negative to the company? And you decide.
This conversation that conservatives are being silenced in organizations now, I haven’t seen it. The other side of your question, I think unpacking it, is what’s driving all this? Put aside universities for one. In corporate America, when I talk to people in corporate America about DEI, they always start talking about ideology.
I’ve talked to Bill Ackman, who you’ve had on, and when I asked him, “Bill, you run your own companies. Who’s telling you what to do?” “They are.” “Who’s they? “It’s the universities, the people who have this ideology of DEI.” I’m like, “Did they force you? Did they coerce you? Did you lose control of your company?” “No, it’s not me. It happens to other people.” Then I talk to other people, same thing.
I try not to go one-on-one in Twitter conversations on this topic. In the DMs, I’ll talk to people who are really conservative and I’ll ask the same question and be like, “Who’s forcing you to do this?” “It’s the ideology that’s everywhere. Didn’t see the Harvard thing in University of North Carolina.” I’m like I’ve never had anybody try to push me in this direction to do this. This was my business choice. I’m not trying to tell other people you have to do this. You make your own business choices. Where companies have made their business choices, and if somebody doesn’t feel confident or comfortable with it, they may feel they’re being discriminated against.
There was something I just read in the Wall Street Journal, where the Wall Street Journal had a company interview 2 million people, and the difficulty in firing and how people, when they were fired, 40% of the people who were fired felt like it was wrong, that they were doing a great job. Then it talked about the HR person going through the hassle of trying to explain to this person through performance reviews that they weren’t doing a good job, yet the people still thought they were doing a great job, despite being told they’re not doing a good job.
I see that as being an analogous to all this huffing and puffing about reverse discrimination and conservatives not being able to speak up because if 40% of people who have been fired don’t believe they should have been fired, there’s a disconnect somewhere in how you think you’re doing your job. If you just feel like, I can’t speak up because of it, because of you’re white, and that doesn’t comport well with DEI programs, a lot of things are going to happen.
Either that’s going to come up in your performance review, HR or your boss is going to have to address it in some way, it’s going to get to HR at some level, and then decisions are going to have to be made. You can’t just fire somebody because they spoke up. Somebody’s going to have to communicate with you. I think a lot of… I just don’t trust the supposed volume-
Mark Cuban
I just don’t trust the supposed volume that people say it’s happening at, versus everything I’ve read and seen. And when I talk to people in positions of authority within organizations and ask them who’s forcing them to implement these ideologies, nobody says… Nobody says yes, that there is somebody. But on Twitter, it sounds great.
I just don’t trust the supposed volume that people say it’s happening at, versus everything I’ve read and seen. And when I talk to people in positions of authority within organizations and ask them who’s forcing them to implement these ideologies, nobody says… Nobody says yes, that there is somebody. But on Twitter, it sounds great.
Lex Fridman
It is true for Conservatives, but in general, you can sell books, you can get likes when you talk about this ideology, and there’s a degree to which, “Is this woke ideology in the room with us right now?” Meaning it’s this boogie monster that we’re all…
It is true for Conservatives, but in general, you can sell books, you can get likes when you talk about this ideology, and there’s a degree to which, “Is this woke ideology in the room with us right now?” Meaning it’s this boogie monster that we’re all…
Mark Cuban
Or is it a positive?
Or is it a positive?
Lex Fridman
I guess another way to say that is they don’t highlight a lot of the positive progress that’s been made in the positive version of the word “woke” in terms of correcting some of the wrongs done in the past.
I guess another way to say that is they don’t highlight a lot of the positive progress that’s been made in the positive version of the word “woke” in terms of correcting some of the wrongs done in the past.
But that said, if you ask people in Russia, a lot of them will say, “There’s no propaganda here. There’s no censorship.” And all that kind of stuff. It’s sometimes hard to see when you’re in it that this stuff is happening. It does seem difficult to criticize DEI programs, not horribly difficult, terrible, they are this monster that infiltrates everything, but it is difficult and it requires great leadership.
Mark Cuban
So where have you criticized it and been condemned? Academic or…
So where have you criticized it and been condemned? Academic or…
Lex Fridman
Academic.
Academic.
Mark Cuban
Okay. Academic, let’s… Two different worlds.
Okay. Academic, let’s… Two different worlds.
Lex Fridman
Companies and academic, yeah.
Companies and academic, yeah.
Mark Cuban
Two different worlds.
Two different worlds.
Lex Fridman
But I also think it’s not… I really want to point my finger at the failure of leadership of basically firing mediocre people. People that are not good at their job. The problem to me is DEI’s defense mechanism, like immune system, is so strong that the shitty people don’t get fired. So the vision, the ideal of DEI is a beautiful ideal. It’s just like…
But I also think it’s not… I really want to point my finger at the failure of leadership of basically firing mediocre people. People that are not good at their job. The problem to me is DEI’s defense mechanism, like immune system, is so strong that the shitty people don’t get fired. So the vision, the ideal of DEI is a beautiful ideal. It’s just like…
Mark Cuban
Well, maybe it’s because I’m an entrepreneur, when I see an ideal that you try to implement it, and support it, and get to that point. But universities and companies are night and day different.
Well, maybe it’s because I’m an entrepreneur, when I see an ideal that you try to implement it, and support it, and get to that point. But universities and companies are night and day different.
I can see an argument for the ideology in a university. I can see, you look at the amount of money spent on it. And so while the goal is right, the way they implement it in universities, the way they implement most things in universities, is wrong. There’s a reason why tuition has gone up a multitude, or a multiple, of inflation. They’re not well run organizations across the board. So I’m not going to argue with that at all. So when you’ve seen me argue with DEI, I haven’t waded into DEI in universities at all.
Lex Fridman
That’s mostly focused on companies.
That’s mostly focused on companies.
Mark Cuban
A hundred percent because that’s where I exist. But at the same time, I read Christopher Rufo’s book where he talks about the genealogy of wokeism and ideology, but then he gets to the point, and I hope I’m remembering this right, where he says that the response to it is decentralized activism, if you will, that’s not the word he used, to try to counter that DEI.
A hundred percent because that’s where I exist. But at the same time, I read Christopher Rufo’s book where he talks about the genealogy of wokeism and ideology, but then he gets to the point, and I hope I’m remembering this right, where he says that the response to it is decentralized activism, if you will, that’s not the word he used, to try to counter that DEI.
And that seems, to me, to be counter to the whole Conservative movement right now, other than school boards where it’s centralized, and the Republican candidate is all about centralized power in him. And to me, that’s just a conflict in a lot of the underpinning of the whole DEI conversation, that a lot of which goes through Christopher Rufo right now.
Lex Fridman
Let’s continue on a theme of fun exchanges on the internet.
Let’s continue on a theme of fun exchanges on the internet.
So Elon tweeted, “The fundamental axiomatic flaw of the woke mind virus is that the weaker party’s always right (in even if they want you to die).”
And you responded, at length, but the beginning is, “The fundamental axiomatic flaw of the anti-woke mind is that it allows groups with historical power to play the victim by taking anecdotal examples and packaging them into conjured conspiratorial ideology that threatens to upend the power structures they have been depending on.”
Mark Cuban
Says it all, right?
Says it all, right?
Lex Fridman
Well, there’s a tension there. So, yes, but both can be abused. Both positions of power can be abused. There’s power in DEI, and there’s shitty people that can crave power, and hold onto power, and sacrifice their ideals.
Well, there’s a tension there. So, yes, but both can be abused. Both positions of power can be abused. There’s power in DEI, and there’s shitty people that can crave power, and hold onto power, and sacrifice their ideals.
Mark Cuban
Okay. Put aside universities.
Okay. Put aside universities.
Lex Fridman
Dammit.
Dammit.
Mark Cuban
Because I’m not going to argue that universities implement DEI well, and I’m not going to tell you that they need to be spending twenty-some million dollars a year on DEI positions. To me, that’s insane. Do I look at the Harvard and North Carolina decision and say it was a great decision? No, because I think having a diverse student body helps make for kids who are better prepared for the real world. But I’m not running a university, so it’s not my choice. Maybe at some point in the future I will, but not now. And in terms of terms the corporate side of it, who’s telling anybody what to do?
Because I’m not going to argue that universities implement DEI well, and I’m not going to tell you that they need to be spending twenty-some million dollars a year on DEI positions. To me, that’s insane. Do I look at the Harvard and North Carolina decision and say it was a great decision? No, because I think having a diverse student body helps make for kids who are better prepared for the real world. But I’m not running a university, so it’s not my choice. Maybe at some point in the future I will, but not now. And in terms of terms the corporate side of it, who’s telling anybody what to do?
Lex Fridman
Well, maybe you can give me some help.
Well, maybe you can give me some help.
Mark Cuban
Sure. I’m here to help you, Lex.
Sure. I’m here to help you, Lex.
Lex Fridman
There’s an example in the AI world of a system called Gemini 15, Google…
There’s an example in the AI world of a system called Gemini 15, Google…
Mark Cuban
Everybody was black or whatever, people of color.
Everybody was black or whatever, people of color.
Lex Fridman
George Washington was Black, Nazis were Black.
George Washington was Black, Nazis were Black.
Mark Cuban
So why is it when that came out, it was a big uproar, but when somebody… So, who was it? One of the people who were trying to fuck with me, I forget which one.
So why is it when that came out, it was a big uproar, but when somebody… So, who was it? One of the people who were trying to fuck with me, I forget which one.
Lex Fridman
There’s so many people.
There’s so many people.
Mark Cuban
But he pointed out to Elon that Grok, Elon’s AI, was woke when it answered certain questions, and other people have pointed out other things to Elon about Grok, however it’s pronounced, that was leaning left or woke. And Elon’s response was, “Oh, it’ll change. It’s a mistake. We’re fixing it.” When it happens to Gemini and Google, it’s the end of the world. “Look how woke they are. And it’s a reflection of all their culture.” Now Google comes out and says it’s a mistake. And then they doxxed the guy who’s the Product Manager or whatever of AI, of that product who… And then they go back and look at his old tweets, and show that he’s very left leaning and very DEI supportive, and that’s the end of the world.
But he pointed out to Elon that Grok, Elon’s AI, was woke when it answered certain questions, and other people have pointed out other things to Elon about Grok, however it’s pronounced, that was leaning left or woke. And Elon’s response was, “Oh, it’ll change. It’s a mistake. We’re fixing it.” When it happens to Gemini and Google, it’s the end of the world. “Look how woke they are. And it’s a reflection of all their culture.” Now Google comes out and says it’s a mistake. And then they doxxed the guy who’s the Product Manager or whatever of AI, of that product who… And then they go back and look at his old tweets, and show that he’s very left leaning and very DEI supportive, and that’s the end of the world.
Lex Fridman
It’s not the end of the world, but Google’s so much dependent on trust, that trust a Google search has as objective as possible, channel into the world of information. And so that brand is really important for us.
It’s not the end of the world, but Google’s so much dependent on trust, that trust a Google search has as objective as possible, channel into the world of information. And so that brand is really important for us.
Mark Cuban
So you’re giving them too much power. And maybe I’m not recognizing the power. So I’ll tell you a personal experience.
So you’re giving them too much power. And maybe I’m not recognizing the power. So I’ll tell you a personal experience.
Up until a month ago, maybe if you put in keto gummies, Shark Tank keto gummies, into Google, it would show up with scammy ads, scam ad, after scam. And I would get emails, up until a month ago, from elderly people asking me why the gummies weren’t working, and why the companies were charging all this money on a month-by-month basis when they tried to cancel. And they said it was the number one deal on Shark Tank of all time and all Shark… It was a mistake.
Lex Fridman
Well, there’s fraud, there’s mistakes, but the mistakes…
Well, there’s fraud, there’s mistakes, but the mistakes…
Mark Cuban
No, but why didn’t Google fix it? This just didn’t happen once over one week, over two weeks. And because it was hard to fix. As it turns out, I was working with them to try to find a fix, and we would both look at the same page. And, if you were inside of Google within the Google. com domain, it would show one page. If you were outside of Google, it would show another. And it took us looking at it at the same time for anybody to realize it. Meaning that there’s a lot of technology problems that are hard to fix.
No, but why didn’t Google fix it? This just didn’t happen once over one week, over two weeks. And because it was hard to fix. As it turns out, I was working with them to try to find a fix, and we would both look at the same page. And, if you were inside of Google within the Google. com domain, it would show one page. If you were outside of Google, it would show another. And it took us looking at it at the same time for anybody to realize it. Meaning that there’s a lot of technology problems that are hard to fix.
Lex Fridman
They’re super complex, and we could talk about it forever with social media. The criticism towards Google, towards other companies when they’re based in Silicon Valley, there could be an ideological drift into an ideological bubble out of which the technology is created, and they could be blind to the obvious bias that comes inherent to…
They’re super complex, and we could talk about it forever with social media. The criticism towards Google, towards other companies when they’re based in Silicon Valley, there could be an ideological drift into an ideological bubble out of which the technology is created, and they could be blind to the obvious bias that comes inherent to…
Mark Cuban
But they’ve got billions of customers who are not going to… So what you’re saying is, the free market stops with artificial intelligence, that people don’t pay attention and respond, that Google doesn’t listen to the responses, that people inside of Google will ignore their own best financial interest, and even their own best personal interest, because they know they’re going to get doxxed now by Elon and others, and so I just don’t see that.
But they’ve got billions of customers who are not going to… So what you’re saying is, the free market stops with artificial intelligence, that people don’t pay attention and respond, that Google doesn’t listen to the responses, that people inside of Google will ignore their own best financial interest, and even their own best personal interest, because they know they’re going to get doxxed now by Elon and others, and so I just don’t see that.
And Elon’s not allowed to make those same mistakes, but… Elon’s allowed to make those mistakes, but Google isn’t?
Lex Fridman
Oh, no. Elon is 100% should be criticized for the ridiculousness of overstatements that he makes about various products. He’s having a bit of fun, like you are also, and I also believe in the free market, but it’s not always efficient. There’s a delay.
Oh, no. Elon is 100% should be criticized for the ridiculousness of overstatements that he makes about various products. He’s having a bit of fun, like you are also, and I also believe in the free market, but it’s not always efficient. There’s a delay.
Mark Cuban
Just takes time. It’s fine.
Just takes time. It’s fine.
Lex Fridman
So which is why Elon is important when calling out, I think overstating the criticism of Gemini, but Elon and others are just…
So which is why Elon is important when calling out, I think overstating the criticism of Gemini, but Elon and others are just…
Mark Cuban
Gemini wasn’t even a fully available public product yet.
Gemini wasn’t even a fully available public product yet.
Lex Fridman
It’s still a bias that resonates with people.
It’s still a bias that resonates with people.
Mark Cuban
That’s the way neural networks work though. That’s why there’ll be millions of models, because weights and biases, putting together a neural network.
That’s the way neural networks work though. That’s why there’ll be millions of models, because weights and biases, putting together a neural network.
Lex Fridman
No. So the Black George Washington is a correction on top of the foundation model to keep it “safe.” One of the big criticisms of all of the models, frankly, probably even Grok, a little bit less so, is they’re trying to be really conservative in the sense of trying to be careful not to say crazy shit, because we don’t know how the thing…
No. So the Black George Washington is a correction on top of the foundation model to keep it “safe.” One of the big criticisms of all of the models, frankly, probably even Grok, a little bit less so, is they’re trying to be really conservative in the sense of trying to be careful not to say crazy shit, because we don’t know how the thing…
Mark Cuban
It’s brand new and we know what happens, and they do it on the front end with prompts, and they try to do it on the back end with the neural networks that are underneath them, and it doesn’t always work. And that’s why there’s going to be millions of models rather than just four foundational models, or five, that everybody uses.
It’s brand new and we know what happens, and they do it on the front end with prompts, and they try to do it on the back end with the neural networks that are underneath them, and it doesn’t always work. And that’s why there’s going to be millions of models rather than just four foundational models, or five, that everybody uses.
Lex Fridman
Well, I guess the main criticism is you want to have some transparency of all the teams that are involved and that this kind of… To the degree there’s a left-leaning ideology within the companies, it doesn’t affect the product.
Well, I guess the main criticism is you want to have some transparency of all the teams that are involved and that this kind of… To the degree there’s a left-leaning ideology within the companies, it doesn’t affect the product.
Mark Cuban
But that’s the beauty of…
But that’s the beauty of…
Lex Fridman
The free market.
The free market.
Mark Cuban
That’s where the market corrects it. And not only from the outside, because everybody is going to test it. When YouTube first came out, or not first came out, after Google bought them, there used to be different commands you could give it. There were prompt commands that you could give it, and you could find all the nasty porn that got loaded before they kicked it off. And it was just the nastiest shit ever. And even now to this day, if there’s some horrific tragic event, somebody’s loading it up.
That’s where the market corrects it. And not only from the outside, because everybody is going to test it. When YouTube first came out, or not first came out, after Google bought them, there used to be different commands you could give it. There were prompt commands that you could give it, and you could find all the nasty porn that got loaded before they kicked it off. And it was just the nastiest shit ever. And even now to this day, if there’s some horrific tragic event, somebody’s loading it up.
Now, I know that’s not direct to your point of internal influence to the output, but people on the outside are going to check for that now. It’s almost like the new bug contest to try to find bugs in software. And then on the inside, if it’s all left-leaning, and all you have is left-leaning employees, because most Conservatives won’t want to work there, then again that’s self-correcting as well.
Lex Fridman
That’s the hope, but it can self-correct in different kinds of ways. You can have a different company that competes and becomes more conservative. My worry is that it becomes two different worlds where there’s like…
That’s the hope, but it can self-correct in different kinds of ways. You can have a different company that competes and becomes more conservative. My worry is that it becomes two different worlds where there’s like…
Mark Cuban
Already is.
Already is.
Lex Fridman
No, come on, don’t give up.
No, come on, don’t give up.
Mark Cuban
Oh, I’m not giving up. So where does this go? Is the question. What happens next? And going back, I’ve been in so many PC revolutions, or evolutions, where porn was the big issue. Now we don’t even talk about porn being an issue, even though every post on Twitter now has “link in bio” for a porn post, we don’t even think that’s a negative anymore. That’s just an accepted thing. And now it is become very… Where your politics on Twitter. But again, as you extend that and things grow, as AI models become more efficient, and trainable for a lot less money, or even locally on a PC or a phone, we’re all going to have our own models, and there’s going to be millions, and millions, and millions of models and not just foundational models.
Oh, I’m not giving up. So where does this go? Is the question. What happens next? And going back, I’ve been in so many PC revolutions, or evolutions, where porn was the big issue. Now we don’t even talk about porn being an issue, even though every post on Twitter now has “link in bio” for a porn post, we don’t even think that’s a negative anymore. That’s just an accepted thing. And now it is become very… Where your politics on Twitter. But again, as you extend that and things grow, as AI models become more efficient, and trainable for a lot less money, or even locally on a PC or a phone, we’re all going to have our own models, and there’s going to be millions, and millions, and millions of models and not just foundational models.
Now maybe they’re built some on open source, maybe it’ll be copy-pasta where you can just cut and paste and create your own model and train it yourself. Maybe it’ll be mixture of experts where maybe it’ll be a Meta front end. Like we’re working on a project where we take 30 different AI models and there’s just a Meta search engine where it searches all of them, and you can compare all the outputs and see what you think is the best, like a search engine. Because you might get, “Is DEI good?” “Is the Covid vaccine good?” You’re going to get a variety of outputs and you have to make that decision yourself.
That’s what I think is going to happen with AI as well, because I think brands… There’s no way the Mayo Clinic and the Harvard Medical School are just going to contribute all their IP to ChatGPT, or Gemini, or whatever. It’s going to have to be licensed or they’re going to do their own.
Lex Fridman
That’s a very hopeful message. But that said, human history doesn’t always autocorrect really quickly, self-correct, really quickly. Sometimes you get into these very painful things. You have Stalin, you have Hitler, you can get to places very quickly where the ideological thing just builds on itself.
That’s a very hopeful message. But that said, human history doesn’t always autocorrect really quickly, self-correct, really quickly. Sometimes you get into these very painful things. You have Stalin, you have Hitler, you can get to places very quickly where the ideological thing just builds on itself.
Mark Cuban
Twitter is not real world. There’s 20…
Twitter is not real world. There’s 20…
Lex Fridman
Twitter is not real world. That’s true, yes, but you could still have a nation captured by an ideology.
Twitter is not real world. That’s true, yes, but you could still have a nation captured by an ideology.
I think America has been really good at having these two blue and red, always at tension with each other, dividing the populace, and in the process of doing that, figuring stuff out. Almost like playing devil’s advocate, but in real life.
Mark Cuban
And that’s fair. And that’s right. As opposed to Pravda telling you everything you want to know and everybody believing it, because there’s control of everything.
And that’s fair. And that’s right. As opposed to Pravda telling you everything you want to know and everybody believing it, because there’s control of everything.
And so going back to what you said earlier, people in Russia don’t think invading Ukraine… A lot of them see it as a positive. I’m sure you have relatives and friends who think it’s the best thing that ever happened, because they believe in Putin.
Lex Fridman
They’re denazifying Ukraine, they’re removing the Nazis from Ukraine.
They’re denazifying Ukraine, they’re removing the Nazis from Ukraine.
Mark Cuban
Because exactly what Putin said. And we don’t have one uniform media outlet. That’s the difference. Even though people like to talk about mainstream media as being the source of a lot of the friction, there is no such thing as mainstream media anymore. Fox is the biggest cable news channel with the biggest audience, and they call everybody else mainstream media. It’s insane the things that we accept from our sources of information. To me, that’s the bigger problem. The bigger problem is trying to figure out what is free speech and what is the line of tolerance for free speech? And at what point does hateful free speech crowd out other people? Putin’s the master of that. You’re going to jail or you’re going to be dead if you disagree. Now, God help us if we ever get to that point here, but the person who controls the algorithm controls the world. And if you are committed to one specific platform as your singular source of information or affiliated platforms, then whoever controls the algorithm or the programming there controls you, in a lot of respects. And I think that’s where our biggest problem has been. We get people attached to specific platforms, and apps, and media outlets, and they become part of that team, and they identify as such, and either you’re part of the team or you’re not. And that to me is the fundamental problem.
Because exactly what Putin said. And we don’t have one uniform media outlet. That’s the difference. Even though people like to talk about mainstream media as being the source of a lot of the friction, there is no such thing as mainstream media anymore. Fox is the biggest cable news channel with the biggest audience, and they call everybody else mainstream media. It’s insane the things that we accept from our sources of information. To me, that’s the bigger problem. The bigger problem is trying to figure out what is free speech and what is the line of tolerance for free speech? And at what point does hateful free speech crowd out other people? Putin’s the master of that. You’re going to jail or you’re going to be dead if you disagree. Now, God help us if we ever get to that point here, but the person who controls the algorithm controls the world. And if you are committed to one specific platform as your singular source of information or affiliated platforms, then whoever controls the algorithm or the programming there controls you, in a lot of respects. And I think that’s where our biggest problem has been. We get people attached to specific platforms, and apps, and media outlets, and they become part of that team, and they identify as such, and either you’re part of the team or you’re not. And that to me is the fundamental problem.
It’s not woke ideology, because I never felt any pressure to make the choices that I’ve chosen, including diversity, equity, and inclusion, and I’ve never forced anybody or told anybody to do it. I just said, “Here’s my experiences.” Whenever I’ve talked to people who talk about the woke ideology, no one ever got forced. If you look at Dylan McDermott, if there was a way to gauge the number of impressions that she had, and where they sourced from, I’d be willing bet any amount of money that 90% plus of the impressions and discussions of Dylan McDermott were on, right-leaning media.
Lex Fridman
Several things, actually, let’s even go there. You gotten a bit of a beef with, again, fun, with Jordan Peterson about this.
Several things, actually, let’s even go there. You gotten a bit of a beef with, again, fun, with Jordan Peterson about this.
Mark Cuban
That’s the guy whose name I couldn’t think of.
That’s the guy whose name I couldn’t think of.
Lex Fridman
So the topic there was the gender transition and Dylan Mulvaney. Can you explain the nature of the beef? It’s an interesting claim you’re making and most of the people who are concerned about this are Conservatives.
So the topic there was the gender transition and Dylan Mulvaney. Can you explain the nature of the beef? It’s an interesting claim you’re making and most of the people who are concerned about this are Conservatives.
Mark Cuban
The point is that if you looked at impressions when you run an ad, you’re curious about impressions and who sees them, but if you look at the impressions related to Dylan McDermott, like I just said, I bet 90% or more were in conservative media, and I don’t know how many followers she had, 250,000 followers or whatever when the Bud Light ad came out. And if it weren’t for Kid Rock shooting at Dylan McDermott Bud Light cans, she’d be long forgotten.
The point is that if you looked at impressions when you run an ad, you’re curious about impressions and who sees them, but if you look at the impressions related to Dylan McDermott, like I just said, I bet 90% or more were in conservative media, and I don’t know how many followers she had, 250,000 followers or whatever when the Bud Light ad came out. And if it weren’t for Kid Rock shooting at Dylan McDermott Bud Light cans, she’d be long forgotten.
Lex Fridman
But most of the people that care about censorship are going to be free speech advocates. So most people that care about Putin suppressing speech, or anybody else suppressing speech, are going to be libertarian. So there’s probably an explanation of that.
But most of the people that care about censorship are going to be free speech advocates. So most people that care about Putin suppressing speech, or anybody else suppressing speech, are going to be libertarian. So there’s probably an explanation of that.
The criticism that Jordan Peterson could provide, I guess he said that Dylan Mulvaney popularized the kind of mutilation in his view, that can affect… There’s a very serious life-changing process that a person goes through, and when that’s applied to a child, it can do a lot of harm to a person if…
Mark Cuban
But my point still holds, I don’t know how many kids were following, and you could look at the followers list, it’s not like it’s hidden. Back then, if they had 250,000 followers and now we’re on TikTok where he might get 50 some thousand views or likes, I don’t know how many views, but likes, I’ve never seen any evidence that Dylan McDermott influenced people to transition their gender. As he transitioned to her, it was documented on TikTok over the course of a year. And again, when you go back and look at the views on those TikToks, it wasn’t enormous.
But my point still holds, I don’t know how many kids were following, and you could look at the followers list, it’s not like it’s hidden. Back then, if they had 250,000 followers and now we’re on TikTok where he might get 50 some thousand views or likes, I don’t know how many views, but likes, I’ve never seen any evidence that Dylan McDermott influenced people to transition their gender. As he transitioned to her, it was documented on TikTok over the course of a year. And again, when you go back and look at the views on those TikToks, it wasn’t enormous.
Lex Fridman
But the trends start. It could be… What worries people is for young kids there to be a trend of, especially when you feel like an outsider, you feel not yourself, less than yourself, all this kind of stuff that kids feel like, that if it’s because popular enough, if it’s a trend, you would gender transition without meaning to do that. It is just part of a trend. That’s the worry they have.
But the trends start. It could be… What worries people is for young kids there to be a trend of, especially when you feel like an outsider, you feel not yourself, less than yourself, all this kind of stuff that kids feel like, that if it’s because popular enough, if it’s a trend, you would gender transition without meaning to do that. It is just part of a trend. That’s the worry they have.
Mark Cuban
That is a big stretch, to think that all the things that have to happen before you transition gender, and I’m not saying kids might find it cool, or in the moment expedient, if you will, to dress up as the other gender. Great, who cares? But to go through the actual physical transition, I don’t remember what the numbers were that I read, but I do remember that the latest numbers that came out in terms of transitioning were from JAMA, which is a medical association, that said from 2021 to 2022, the numbers went down.
That is a big stretch, to think that all the things that have to happen before you transition gender, and I’m not saying kids might find it cool, or in the moment expedient, if you will, to dress up as the other gender. Great, who cares? But to go through the actual physical transition, I don’t remember what the numbers were that I read, but I do remember that the latest numbers that came out in terms of transitioning were from JAMA, which is a medical association, that said from 2021 to 2022, the numbers went down.
But the bigger point is there are no numbers for 2023 when, post-Dylan McDermott. So there’s no way to know if the assertion is true, even marginally true. Now, you can easily suggest it, but you can say that about any social media influencer. Kids are dying because… It’s just like when people accused Trump of potentially influencing people to inject bleach into their veins. That’s a big old leap to say that because Trump says it, that people are going to start injecting, and then they find somebody who actually did. And it’s like, “Oh, it must be true. This is a trend now.” I’m just not buying it that there aren’t enough roadblocks in the way.
Now, I’m not saying it never happens, and for me, to me, you should have to wait until you’re 18 to actually have any surgery to transition. And if your parents approve it earlier, then you can have a conversation with your doctor. But you’re suggesting that everybody in that process to transition, a minor is corrupt. That the doctor, the sociologist, the psychologist, all the people involved, the hospital where the surgery is happening, the insurance company that’s paying for it, they all have been corrupted by this trend. I just don’t see that.
Lex Fridman
Well, not corrupted, but people, it’s back to the DEI thing, there could be pressure, and we are…
Well, not corrupted, but people, it’s back to the DEI thing, there could be pressure, and we are…
Mark Cuban
Pressure to operate? So think about all the people who have to be complicit to do an operation.
Pressure to operate? So think about all the people who have to be complicit to do an operation.
Lex Fridman
It’s not complicit like evil complicit. It’s more…
It’s not complicit like evil complicit. It’s more…
Mark Cuban
No, it is evil complicit. Because somebody…. In hospitals right now, they won’t perform abortions because of state law. In Alabama, they stopped IVF treatment immediately after that ruling by that judge, the Q Anon judge, to think that they’re not going to pay attention to the possible consequences of being the hospital that does transgender, that gives doctors operating rights there and not be aware of the risks associated with it and double check, to me, that’s just insane. They’re risking their entire business, and livelihood, and personal relationships for not checking that this fourteen-year-old boy who wants to be a girl or vice versa, is there waiting for surgery. I just don’t see that.
No, it is evil complicit. Because somebody…. In hospitals right now, they won’t perform abortions because of state law. In Alabama, they stopped IVF treatment immediately after that ruling by that judge, the Q Anon judge, to think that they’re not going to pay attention to the possible consequences of being the hospital that does transgender, that gives doctors operating rights there and not be aware of the risks associated with it and double check, to me, that’s just insane. They’re risking their entire business, and livelihood, and personal relationships for not checking that this fourteen-year-old boy who wants to be a girl or vice versa, is there waiting for surgery. I just don’t see that.
Lex Fridman
In America, yes. But if we look at humans in general, and Jordan Peterson, I think unjustly, incorrectly brought up Auschwitz.
In America, yes. But if we look at humans in general, and Jordan Peterson, I think unjustly, incorrectly brought up Auschwitz.
Mark Cuban
That was ridiculous.
That was ridiculous.
Lex Fridman
But if we look… To me, World War II is a very interesting time. It does reveal a lot about human nature, and that humans are able to commit atrocities without really speaking up. The point I want to make is that when you’re in this situation where everybody is around you is committing an atrocity, you can be the good German…
But if we look… To me, World War II is a very interesting time. It does reveal a lot about human nature, and that humans are able to commit atrocities without really speaking up. The point I want to make is that when you’re in this situation where everybody is around you is committing an atrocity, you can be the good German…
Mark Cuban
But…
But…
Lex Fridman
Human nature is such that you can do [inaudible 01:32:41] things.
Human nature is such that you can do [inaudible 01:32:41] things.
Mark Cuban
But that is in a time of war.
But that is in a time of war.
Lex Fridman
But it’s still human nature. It’s interesting to remember that.
But it’s still human nature. It’s interesting to remember that.
Mark Cuban
It’s a time of war when you feel like there’s nationalism, patriotism, everything that comes up. Russia, the moms of the kids sent to Ukraine who didn’t come back, in Russia, feels certainly different than the everyday Russian who’s just taking whatever information that’s available from a unified controlled media.
It’s a time of war when you feel like there’s nationalism, patriotism, everything that comes up. Russia, the moms of the kids sent to Ukraine who didn’t come back, in Russia, feels certainly different than the everyday Russian who’s just taking whatever information that’s available from a unified controlled media.
Lex Fridman
But we should remember human nature. It’s interesting.
But we should remember human nature. It’s interesting.
Mark Cuban
I’m not dismissing human nature at all, but there’s a difference. I think that human nature, self-preservation influences those decisions. There’s nothing about self-preservation involved in DEI, wokeness, transgenderism to compare it to Auschwitz. That’s insane.
I’m not dismissing human nature at all, but there’s a difference. I think that human nature, self-preservation influences those decisions. There’s nothing about self-preservation involved in DEI, wokeness, transgenderism to compare it to Auschwitz. That’s insane.
Lex Fridman
Well, that comparison is almost always, probably always, is insane comparison between anything and the Holocaust.
Well, that comparison is almost always, probably always, is insane comparison between anything and the Holocaust.
Mark Cuban
I agree.
I agree.
Lex Fridman
I think there’s a name for that rule, but once you bring up Hitler, the conversation ends.
I think there’s a name for that rule, but once you bring up Hitler, the conversation ends.
Trump vs Biden
Mark Cuban
Goes away.
Goes away.
Lex Fridman
I do appreciate you bringing up Trump and bleach as an example. So continuing on fun exchanges between you and Elon, you said, “If they were having Biden’s last wake and it was him versus Trump, and he was being given last rights, I would still vote for Biden.” To which Elon replied, caricaturing you, “If Biden were a flesh-eating zombie with five seconds to live, where, upon being reelected, Earth would plunge into a 1000 years of darkness, I would still vote for him.”
I do appreciate you bringing up Trump and bleach as an example. So continuing on fun exchanges between you and Elon, you said, “If they were having Biden’s last wake and it was him versus Trump, and he was being given last rights, I would still vote for Biden.” To which Elon replied, caricaturing you, “If Biden were a flesh-eating zombie with five seconds to live, where, upon being reelected, Earth would plunge into a 1000 years of darkness, I would still vote for him.”
That’s basically quoting you, but in a caricature. And you responded, “While, I have your attention. Wanted to say thank you! Your consultants at Tesla followed up about using Cost Plus drugs…” About which we’ll talk about. “… To save the company money. Truly appreciated.” And in parentheses, “(My limit is 300 years of darkness.)” Very well done, Mark.
What’s your intuition, if we just stick on Biden and Trump for a sec, what’s your intuition why Biden would make a better president than Trump?
Mark Cuban
Look at the basics. If you look at the people he’s hired, there hasn’t been any turnover in his cabinet at all. If you look at the people he’s hired over the course of his career, or while he was Vice President in particular, there’s nobody who’s turned on him, and came out, and written books, and made public statements about how he’s bad for the country.
Look at the basics. If you look at the people he’s hired, there hasn’t been any turnover in his cabinet at all. If you look at the people he’s hired over the course of his career, or while he was Vice President in particular, there’s nobody who’s turned on him, and came out, and written books, and made public statements about how he’s bad for the country.
Now, compare that to Trump, the people closest to him, almost all of them turned, unless there’s a financial relationship involved, and to me that says everything.
Lex Fridman
The dynamics of the team is important to you when you [inaudible 01:35:28].
The dynamics of the team is important to you when you [inaudible 01:35:28].
Mark Cuban
If you’re going to be the most powerful person in the world, you better know how to manage and lead. And that’s not to say Biden hasn’t made a lot of mistakes. Immigration, the border, is a horrific mistake, and hopefully he recognizes that. And I don’t like the fact that he doesn’t admit his mistakes and just say, “Okay, I got to fix it.” Or, “I made a mistake in Afghanistan.” Whatever it may be. The position of Commander in Chief and President, you’re going to make mistakes.
If you’re going to be the most powerful person in the world, you better know how to manage and lead. And that’s not to say Biden hasn’t made a lot of mistakes. Immigration, the border, is a horrific mistake, and hopefully he recognizes that. And I don’t like the fact that he doesn’t admit his mistakes and just say, “Okay, I got to fix it.” Or, “I made a mistake in Afghanistan.” Whatever it may be. The position of Commander in Chief and President, you’re going to make mistakes.
Then I look at the other guy, never admits a mistake, and the list is long.
Immigration
Lex Fridman
What do you think about the immigration situation? A lot of Conservatives are using that… The theory is that the reason it’s happening is because they would be able to illegally vote.
What do you think about the immigration situation? A lot of Conservatives are using that… The theory is that the reason it’s happening is because they would be able to illegally vote.
Mark Cuban
That’s insane.
That’s insane.
Lex Fridman
For Biden.
For Biden.
Mark Cuban
You can’t be an illegal immigrant and vote.
You can’t be an illegal immigrant and vote.
And now, in a lot of states, because of the Conservatives, they’ve passed laws saying you have to show identification. When I voted in Texas, you had to show state identification. They can’t vote. You can’t register as an illegal alien, that I’m aware of, to vote.
Lex Fridman
But of course, that story, and it really worries me, enables, or serves as a catalyst for questioning the legitimacy of an election.
But of course, that story, and it really worries me, enables, or serves as a catalyst for questioning the legitimacy of an election.
Mark Cuban
I remember going to the debate with Trump in 2016, and he was debating Clinton, and one of the things he said was, “We don’t even know if this election will be legitimate if I lose.” This was in 2016 before he was even elected, and that was where he was going. That’s just what he does. He’s never admitted a mistake. The guy’s failed a zillion times. Most people say, “Okay, I learned from them.” I read a book about Roy Cohn, and Roy Cohn was the ultimate deny, deny, deny, and that was one of Trump’s mentors. And you can see almost everything that Roy Cohn ever did in the same way that Donald Trump approaches things.
I remember going to the debate with Trump in 2016, and he was debating Clinton, and one of the things he said was, “We don’t even know if this election will be legitimate if I lose.” This was in 2016 before he was even elected, and that was where he was going. That’s just what he does. He’s never admitted a mistake. The guy’s failed a zillion times. Most people say, “Okay, I learned from them.” I read a book about Roy Cohn, and Roy Cohn was the ultimate deny, deny, deny, and that was one of Trump’s mentors. And you can see almost everything that Roy Cohn ever did in the same way that Donald Trump approaches things.
Lex Fridman
But, given how drastic the immigration situation is, that story becomes more believable.
But, given how drastic the immigration situation is, that story becomes more believable.
Mark Cuban
Of course it does, but the facts are still the facts. And in red states, they’re going to be checking every ID, they’re going to be making sure that’s not the case, and you can also make the argument, “Well, in the blue state, it doesn’t matter.” In the swing states, they’re still going to be checking because they know Trump is going to sue the out of them when he loses. And so again, that’s where people will take those self-preservation steps to keep their job and do the right thing.
Of course it does, but the facts are still the facts. And in red states, they’re going to be checking every ID, they’re going to be making sure that’s not the case, and you can also make the argument, “Well, in the blue state, it doesn’t matter.” In the swing states, they’re still going to be checking because they know Trump is going to sue the out of them when he loses. And so again, that’s where people will take those self-preservation steps to keep their job and do the right thing.
There’s still enough people who believe in this country and how amazing it is to do the right thing. And a lot of the premise of what some Conservatives are saying and doing, the underpinning of it is that their fellow citizens will not do anything, not some things, anything, that serves the best interest of this country. And to me, that’s just wrong. That is just misleading and wrong.
Lex Fridman
I just worry about… I don’t care about Trump or Biden, I care about democracy. I just worry. I worry about the viral nature of the idea of this illegal immigrants.
I just worry about… I don’t care about Trump or Biden, I care about democracy. I just worry. I worry about the viral nature of the idea of this illegal immigrants.
Mark Cuban
It’s very functional. Either they get across… There’s a thousand different ways, an unlimited number of ways to enter the United States of America undetected, and the south border where it’s the easiest and the worst, and Biden needs to take steps to reduce that.
It’s very functional. Either they get across… There’s a thousand different ways, an unlimited number of ways to enter the United States of America undetected, and the south border where it’s the easiest and the worst, and Biden needs to take steps to reduce that.
Remember, when Biden was vice president and Obama was president, they called Obama, the Deporter in Chief. He had no problem deporting people. And I think if I had to guess, and this is just a guess, that when they looked at the initial statistics for immigration when Biden took over, they thought there was room for more immigrants, not because they would vote, but you can make a fiscal argument that, in a world where the birth rate is flat to declining, we need immigrants. And immigrants typically don’t have a higher crime rate or anything than indigenous American citizens. Indigenous isn’t the right word, but American citizens. And so they made a calculated mistake. They made a decision that was wrong, and now they have to fix it or it’s going to hurt them severely.
But I don’t buy what Elon’s pushing that the whole reason is they are voters and will become voters.
Lex Fridman
And we should say the obvious, you’re a descendant of immigrants.
And we should say the obvious, you’re a descendant of immigrants.
Mark Cuban
For sure.
For sure.
Lex Fridman
And the immigrants is what makes this country great, in many parts, the diversity of this nation. And we should probably keep the people that are already been in this country for a while and are killing it, like PhD students and all this. It’s like [inaudible 01:40:17].
And the immigrants is what makes this country great, in many parts, the diversity of this nation. And we should probably keep the people that are already been in this country for a while and are killing it, like PhD students and all this. It’s like [inaudible 01:40:17].
Mark Cuban
That’s not what Donald Trump wants, though. He wants to ship them all out. There’s just a whole lot of hyperbole when it comes to talking to all, about talking about all of these things we’re talking about. When it’s right versus left, my team versus your team, my tribe versus your tribe, the only way to stand out is hyperbole.
That’s not what Donald Trump wants, though. He wants to ship them all out. There’s just a whole lot of hyperbole when it comes to talking to all, about talking about all of these things we’re talking about. When it’s right versus left, my team versus your team, my tribe versus your tribe, the only way to stand out is hyperbole.
The hard part, and why I like this conversation, is how do you distinguish hyperbole versus reality? And I get where you’re going, Lex, where it’s like what… The smallest spark sometimes can cause people to change, and then that spark becomes bigger, and then it becomes more widespread, and then all of a sudden your country has changed. It’s not what you thought it was. I get that completely. And yes, you always have to be on top of that to make sure, but a lot of that comes from lack of leadership, and lack of trust, because there’s nobody who’s saying, “All right, Republicans, that’s all hyperbole and you’re wrong for that. Democrats, you fucked up on immigration. You up in Afghanistan. Here’s where you made these mistakes. Own it.”
There’s nobody who says, “We’re not going to just bring in Republicans if the Republicans win.” And there’s nobody who says, “We’re not going to just bring in Democrats. We’re going to bring in a mix. We’re going to try to get balance on the Supreme Court.” There’s no leadership that’s doing it. That’s the fundamental problem. It’s not about the ideology of woke. No leadership.
Lex Fridman
Leadership, whatever systems we’ve created, it’s really frustrating that if you don’t like Trump, it’s really is Trump derangement syndrome. He’s definitely Hitler, and if you don’t like Biden, he’s senile, lizard person…
Leadership, whatever systems we’ve created, it’s really frustrating that if you don’t like Trump, it’s really is Trump derangement syndrome. He’s definitely Hitler, and if you don’t like Biden, he’s senile, lizard person…
Lex Fridman
Senile lizard person that-
Senile lizard person that-
Mark Cuban
Right, everybody gets labeled right because that works on social media. Look, if Elon changed the algorithm just by taking himself out of it, seriously, I’m not saying don’t post, right? Post all you want, but if you look at his followers, they’re almost all right-leaning. If you look at the people he engages with positively, they’re almost all right-leaning. And if you look at the people he engages with negatively, like me, I consider myself an independent, but I lean left on the DEI topic. That influences the algorithm. And so you see what you see because of what he says.
Right, everybody gets labeled right because that works on social media. Look, if Elon changed the algorithm just by taking himself out of it, seriously, I’m not saying don’t post, right? Post all you want, but if you look at his followers, they’re almost all right-leaning. If you look at the people he engages with positively, they’re almost all right-leaning. And if you look at the people he engages with negatively, like me, I consider myself an independent, but I lean left on the DEI topic. That influences the algorithm. And so you see what you see because of what he says.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, well, I mean for sure. But there could be a lot of influential people on Twitter that influence the algorithm and all that kind of stuff. But I do feel it’s not even about ideology where you lean, it’s about the algorithm, not prioritizing drama. The attention grabbing thing or the lower lizard version of that where people just want the drama. They want to tear you down.
Yeah, well, I mean for sure. But there could be a lot of influential people on Twitter that influence the algorithm and all that kind of stuff. But I do feel it’s not even about ideology where you lean, it’s about the algorithm, not prioritizing drama. The attention grabbing thing or the lower lizard version of that where people just want the drama. They want to tear you down.
Mark Cuban
Right. When I last read through all the stuff on their algorithm, right, maybe it’s changed, whoever has the biggest account and gets engagement on that account influences what people see the most.
Right. When I last read through all the stuff on their algorithm, right, maybe it’s changed, whoever has the biggest account and gets engagement on that account influences what people see the most.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I mean, that’s interesting. I don’t know if that’s, to the degree that’s true, they’ve pretty-
Yeah, I mean, that’s interesting. I don’t know if that’s, to the degree that’s true, they’ve pretty-
Mark Cuban
I’m sure it’s still the case.
I’m sure it’s still the case.
Lex Fridman
…Pretty rigorous description of the way the algorithm works. It’s actually kind of fascinating. There’s a clustering of people based on interests-
…Pretty rigorous description of the way the algorithm works. It’s actually kind of fascinating. There’s a clustering of people based on interests-
Mark Cuban
But I think they called the nearest neighbor approach, and I think that’s what they do. And so whoever has the biggest account, has the most neighbors who in turn have their neighbors who in turn have their neighbors, and that’s how they discern what comes next.
But I think they called the nearest neighbor approach, and I think that’s what they do. And so whoever has the biggest account, has the most neighbors who in turn have their neighbors who in turn have their neighbors, and that’s how they discern what comes next.
Lex Fridman
But there’s a clustering still. So if you don’t give a shit about Elon, you’re not-
But there’s a clustering still. So if you don’t give a shit about Elon, you’re not-
Mark Cuban
And you’re not following him, yeah, you’re not following-
And you’re not following him, yeah, you’re not following-
Lex Fridman
You’re not going to have an influence. It’s not going to have an influence.
You’re not going to have an influence. It’s not going to have an influence.
Mark Cuban
When you get a break, just create a burner account on Twitter and see who they recommend to you.
When you get a break, just create a burner account on Twitter and see who they recommend to you.
Lex Fridman
Elon.
Elon.
Mark Cuban
And not just Elon, I mean the people that Elon likes. And I’m saying that’s not Elon saying add this person, add this person and suggest this person, this person, and this person. I’m saying that’s what the algorithm is.
And not just Elon, I mean the people that Elon likes. And I’m saying that’s not Elon saying add this person, add this person and suggest this person, this person, and this person. I’m saying that’s what the algorithm is.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. There should be transparency around that. For sure. That’s the-
Yeah. There should be transparency around that. For sure. That’s the-
Mark Cuban
And there is. There is. And that’s the whole point, right? He knows there’s transparency and he knows the impact. That’s why when I say take yourself out of the algorithm, don’t include his account, that changes I think the output of the algorithm.
And there is. There is. And that’s the whole point, right? He knows there’s transparency and he knows the impact. That’s why when I say take yourself out of the algorithm, don’t include his account, that changes I think the output of the algorithm.
Lex Fridman
Well, when he wasn’t owning Twitter, he was one of the biggest accounts, if not the biggest account already.
Well, when he wasn’t owning Twitter, he was one of the biggest accounts, if not the biggest account already.
Mark Cuban
He wasn’t. But still. even the Kim Kardashian accounts, whatever, it wasn’t open source to Elon’s credit. It is now. So I couldn’t see it to know. Right? So I didn’t get the sense one way or the other of one element being dominant over the other. But obviously conservatives felt that left leaning was more dominant back then.
He wasn’t. But still. even the Kim Kardashian accounts, whatever, it wasn’t open source to Elon’s credit. It is now. So I couldn’t see it to know. Right? So I didn’t get the sense one way or the other of one element being dominant over the other. But obviously conservatives felt that left leaning was more dominant back then.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I would love to see numbers on all of this.
Yeah, I would love to see numbers on all of this.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, you and me both.
Yeah, you and me both.
Lex Fridman
DEI, everything like this. Sometimes anecdotal data really frustrates me. It frustrates me primarily because of how sexy it is. People just love-
DEI, everything like this. Sometimes anecdotal data really frustrates me. It frustrates me primarily because of how sexy it is. People just love-
Mark Cuban
That’s a great way to describe it.
That’s a great way to describe it.
Lex Fridman
Love a story, and I’m like, Goddamn it, this is not science. This is-
Love a story, and I’m like, Goddamn it, this is not science. This is-
Mark Cuban
It’s not even common sense.
It’s not even common sense.
Lex Fridman
Well, no, I think anecdotal stories often have a wisdom in them.
Well, no, I think anecdotal stories often have a wisdom in them.
Mark Cuban
No doubt, right? There’s something to be gained from seeing them.
No doubt, right? There’s something to be gained from seeing them.
Lex Fridman
There’s a signal there, but how representative is that signal of the broader thing?
There’s a signal there, but how representative is that signal of the broader thing?
Mark Cuban
There’s a whole lot more noise than signal more often than not.
There’s a whole lot more noise than signal more often than not.
Drugs and Big Pharma
Lex Fridman
All right, so as I mentioned, Cost Plus Drugs, there’s so many questions I can ask here, but what’s the big question? What’s broken about our healthcare system?
All right, so as I mentioned, Cost Plus Drugs, there’s so many questions I can ask here, but what’s the big question? What’s broken about our healthcare system?
Mark Cuban
There’s no transparency. And when the lack of transparency leads to lack of trust and when you can’t trust the healthcare system other than maybe your doctor, that’s a broken system.
There’s no transparency. And when the lack of transparency leads to lack of trust and when you can’t trust the healthcare system other than maybe your doctor, that’s a broken system.
Lex Fridman
So what aspect of this system does Cost Plus Drugs is trying to solve?
So what aspect of this system does Cost Plus Drugs is trying to solve?
Mark Cuban
So the thing we’re trying to solve for is trust. And the way we feel we get there is through complete transparency. So when you go to costplusdrugs.com and you put in the name of the medication, if it’s one of the 2,500 and growing that we carry, we will first show you our costs, what we actually pay for it, then we’ll show you our 15% markup. Then we’ll show the pharmacy fill fee and shipping, and that’s your total price. And that alone, that transparency alone, is completely revolutionizing how drugs are priced in America today. And it’s led to research being done comparing our pricing to CMS and ours being cheaper than even the government is negotiating, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And so just that transparency alone has had an impact and saved millions of people hundreds of millions of dollars or more.
So the thing we’re trying to solve for is trust. And the way we feel we get there is through complete transparency. So when you go to costplusdrugs.com and you put in the name of the medication, if it’s one of the 2,500 and growing that we carry, we will first show you our costs, what we actually pay for it, then we’ll show you our 15% markup. Then we’ll show the pharmacy fill fee and shipping, and that’s your total price. And that alone, that transparency alone, is completely revolutionizing how drugs are priced in America today. And it’s led to research being done comparing our pricing to CMS and ours being cheaper than even the government is negotiating, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And so just that transparency alone has had an impact and saved millions of people hundreds of millions of dollars or more.
Lex Fridman
And maybe it results in more transparency in other parts of the system too, seeing the business of it. What do the so-called middlemen companies. So the PBMs-
And maybe it results in more transparency in other parts of the system too, seeing the business of it. What do the so-called middlemen companies. So the PBMs-
Mark Cuban
Correct. The pharmacy benefit managers.
Correct. The pharmacy benefit managers.
Lex Fridman
Thank you. CVS Caremark, Cigna’s Express Scripts, and United Health’s Optum Rx, they control majority of the market. What do they do wrong?
Thank you. CVS Caremark, Cigna’s Express Scripts, and United Health’s Optum Rx, they control majority of the market. What do they do wrong?
Mark Cuban
They put profits over everything. And they know in an industry that’s completely opaque, they can pretty much do what they want and nobody gets to see what they’re doing in detail. And so the first thing when you sign a contract with one of those big PBMs, it says you can’t disclose any of this. And the fact that you can’t be disclosed means they could tell Lex’s company that they’re getting a great price and they’re only being charged X. And they can tell Mark’s company, oh, you’re getting a great price and we’re charging Mark X plus, right? But Mark doesn’t know any better because there’s no way to know.
They put profits over everything. And they know in an industry that’s completely opaque, they can pretty much do what they want and nobody gets to see what they’re doing in detail. And so the first thing when you sign a contract with one of those big PBMs, it says you can’t disclose any of this. And the fact that you can’t be disclosed means they could tell Lex’s company that they’re getting a great price and they’re only being charged X. And they can tell Mark’s company, oh, you’re getting a great price and we’re charging Mark X plus, right? But Mark doesn’t know any better because there’s no way to know.
Lex Fridman
The markup is not transparent.
The markup is not transparent.
Mark Cuban
The cost isn’t transparent, the markup isn’t transparent. And there’s different things, like I was just talking to a company in a presentation a couple days ago, and they took the step to leave the big three PBMs to go to a rebate free PBM that was smaller. And what they said led to the decision, they had a contract with the PBM for these things called rebates, where depending on the volume of medications you buy, they’ll kick back to you a percentage of them. And as it turns out, when they compared what was contracted for to what they actually got, they were getting underpaid every single year. They just don’t care. They’ll take products. There’s a drug called Humira, and it is the number one revenue drug in the country. And there’s also a biosimilar, multiple biosimilars, but one we carry called Yusimry. And, Humira, the pre-rebate price is about $8,000 per month. After rebates, depending on the size of the company, it’ll be anywhere from three to $6,000 a month. You can go to get your doctor to prescribe that biosimilar Yusimry and you pay $594. But those big three PBMs won’t allow their clients to get Yusimry because they don’t get a rebate on Yusimry. So they’d rather keep a drug on their formulary, even though their patients, their customers would save a lot of money, they’d rather keep a drug and exclude another because they’ll make a lot more money.
The cost isn’t transparent, the markup isn’t transparent. And there’s different things, like I was just talking to a company in a presentation a couple days ago, and they took the step to leave the big three PBMs to go to a rebate free PBM that was smaller. And what they said led to the decision, they had a contract with the PBM for these things called rebates, where depending on the volume of medications you buy, they’ll kick back to you a percentage of them. And as it turns out, when they compared what was contracted for to what they actually got, they were getting underpaid every single year. They just don’t care. They’ll take products. There’s a drug called Humira, and it is the number one revenue drug in the country. And there’s also a biosimilar, multiple biosimilars, but one we carry called Yusimry. And, Humira, the pre-rebate price is about $8,000 per month. After rebates, depending on the size of the company, it’ll be anywhere from three to $6,000 a month. You can go to get your doctor to prescribe that biosimilar Yusimry and you pay $594. But those big three PBMs won’t allow their clients to get Yusimry because they don’t get a rebate on Yusimry. So they’d rather keep a drug on their formulary, even though their patients, their customers would save a lot of money, they’d rather keep a drug and exclude another because they’ll make a lot more money.
Lex Fridman
So the CVS Caremark spokesperson, I think responded to you, Phil Blando, with the usual language that so deeply exhausts me, but I was wondering if there’s any truth to it. Employers, unions, health plans and government programs work with CVS Caremark precisely because we deliver for them. Lower drug costs, better health outcomes, and broad pharmacy access through our true cost, cost vantage and choice formulary initiatives, we are the leading agent of change, innovation, and transparency in the market.
So the CVS Caremark spokesperson, I think responded to you, Phil Blando, with the usual language that so deeply exhausts me, but I was wondering if there’s any truth to it. Employers, unions, health plans and government programs work with CVS Caremark precisely because we deliver for them. Lower drug costs, better health outcomes, and broad pharmacy access through our true cost, cost vantage and choice formulary initiatives, we are the leading agent of change, innovation, and transparency in the market.
Mark Cuban
That’s a whole lot of nothing.
That’s a whole lot of nothing.
Lex Fridman
So they are not transparent?
So they are not transparent?
Mark Cuban
No. Call them up. You go to Cost Plus Drugs, we’ll give you our price list of all 2,500 plus drugs.
No. Call them up. You go to Cost Plus Drugs, we’ll give you our price list of all 2,500 plus drugs.
Lex Fridman
The actual cost?
The actual cost?
Mark Cuban
The actual cost, and what we sell it for because it’s just a plus 15%. Call up any of the big three companies and ask them for the same thing. They’re going to laugh at you. It’s so bad, in fact, if you do business with them right now and you just ask for your claims data, meaning how many people use Humira that we’re paying, what are we paying for it? They won’t even give it to you unless you really, really scream and yell at them and then they’ll charge you and take six months to get it. So when we moved away from them, we wanted to get what our claims data was to understand what we were going to be facing. They wouldn’t give it to us until six months later, I forget the exact month. And then they charge us for it as well, our own data.
The actual cost, and what we sell it for because it’s just a plus 15%. Call up any of the big three companies and ask them for the same thing. They’re going to laugh at you. It’s so bad, in fact, if you do business with them right now and you just ask for your claims data, meaning how many people use Humira that we’re paying, what are we paying for it? They won’t even give it to you unless you really, really scream and yell at them and then they’ll charge you and take six months to get it. So when we moved away from them, we wanted to get what our claims data was to understand what we were going to be facing. They wouldn’t give it to us until six months later, I forget the exact month. And then they charge us for it as well, our own data.
Lex Fridman
On the CEO front, you’ve said that CEOs don’t understand healthcare coverage and it’s costing them big. What’s the connection between Cost Plus Drugs and companies?
On the CEO front, you’ve said that CEOs don’t understand healthcare coverage and it’s costing them big. What’s the connection between Cost Plus Drugs and companies?
Mark Cuban
I can speak for my own companies, and this applies to all companies, bigger companies that’s self-insured, because we self-insure. When we started Cost Plus, I finally said, okay, it’s time for me to understand how I’m paying for my healthcare for my employees and their families. And the first thing I looked at was a lot of these companies use employee benefits consultants, and turns out I was paying $30 per employee per month, which was millions of dollars a year, and they were just sending us to the companies that paid them the biggest commissions. I’m like, how fucking dumb am I? So I’m like, okay, we’re cutting that. And then I looked at our medication, our prescription deal that goes through the PBMs that we were using and that the consultant connected us with. And I took a list of, this was early on in Cost Plus Drugs, list of the generic drugs that we sold that cost more than $30 that the Mavericks also had purchased.
I can speak for my own companies, and this applies to all companies, bigger companies that’s self-insured, because we self-insure. When we started Cost Plus, I finally said, okay, it’s time for me to understand how I’m paying for my healthcare for my employees and their families. And the first thing I looked at was a lot of these companies use employee benefits consultants, and turns out I was paying $30 per employee per month, which was millions of dollars a year, and they were just sending us to the companies that paid them the biggest commissions. I’m like, how fucking dumb am I? So I’m like, okay, we’re cutting that. And then I looked at our medication, our prescription deal that goes through the PBMs that we were using and that the consultant connected us with. And I took a list of, this was early on in Cost Plus Drugs, list of the generic drugs that we sold that cost more than $30 that the Mavericks also had purchased.
We were able to get that claims data, and it turns out we spent $169,000 with that PBM, one of the big three PBMs, and it would’ve cost us buying from Cost Plus Drugs $19,000. And that’s just a simple example. Then I looked at the insurance side of things. We self-insure, so there weren’t premiums per se, but we were getting charged $17.15 cents per employee per month just to use the network that they put together for us, providers, hospitals or whatever. And I’m like, all right, are there companies that won’t charge us to put together these networks? Turns out there’s a lot of them. And those insurance companies and those PBMs are also responsible for determining what claims, what to authorize and what to deny. So for a drug, it may be, all right, this is an expensive drug, but before they’ll say they’ll pay for the drug that your doctor wants to prescribe for you, you have to try these three other drugs in what’s called step up therapy to see if these other cheaper drugs work or they’re not even necessarily cheaper, they may be being pushed because they’re getting a higher rebate.
And so I’m like, that’s insane. I want my employees to get the medication that the doctors say is best. And so I didn’t realize those were the intricacies of where my healthcare dollars went. There’s not a single CEO who does because that’s not a core competency that they need. And the CFOs, that’s not their core competency and the HR people, they contribute and they understand it some because they’re dealing with the claims, but they spend most of their prescription drug related time or healthcare related times trying to get pre-authorizations approved. So your kid breaks their arm or you get sick and you go to the doctor and before the doctor will do a surgery or do whatever, they have to go to the insurance company and get preauthorized. And then they always say no. And then you have to go back and somebody has to argue for you. And that just eats up employee time because I’m sick or my kid’s sick and you’re wasting my time. Eats up HR time.
The CEOs don’t know any of this, right? So what I’m saying is one, the smartest thing to do is to get a healthcare CEO at every company with over let’s say 500 employees that focuses on all these things. You’d save a shitload of money. And two, healthcare is your second largest line item expense after payroll. And in some companies it’s hundreds, billions of dollars and you don’t understand it and you’re letting these guys rip you off? And it’s because these big CEOs don’t understand it and are getting ripped off that the industry is the way it is because that allows the opacity to continue.
Lex Fridman
That’s fascinating. So that most companies outsource, offload the expertise on the healthcare side when they really should be internally, there should be an expert that [inaudible 01:55:20]-
That’s fascinating. So that most companies outsource, offload the expertise on the healthcare side when they really should be internally, there should be an expert that [inaudible 01:55:20]-
Mark Cuban
Yes, because it’s the wellness of your employees and their families and-
Yes, because it’s the wellness of your employees and their families and-
Lex Fridman
It costs a lot of money.
It costs a lot of money.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, but if your employees aren’t healthy or if they’re worried about their kids and what is more worrisome and detrimental to the performance of a company? A DEI program or having to go to HR and scream and yell and explain, and your doctor wasting their time doing the same thing to get authorization for a surgery or a medication? It’s insane.
Yeah, but if your employees aren’t healthy or if they’re worried about their kids and what is more worrisome and detrimental to the performance of a company? A DEI program or having to go to HR and scream and yell and explain, and your doctor wasting their time doing the same thing to get authorization for a surgery or a medication? It’s insane.
Lex Fridman
What made you decide to step into this cartel-like situation where so much is opaque?
What made you decide to step into this cartel-like situation where so much is opaque?
Mark Cuban
So I got a cold email from a Dr. Alex Oshmyancy, who’s my co-founder. He’s a radiologist by trade in a physicist and a smart mother fucker. And he had a pharmacy that he wanted to create a compounding pharmacy that would manufacture generic drugs that were in short supply because it happens all the time that things aren’t available. I’m like, you’re thinking too small. We should do something on a much bigger scale. And then it was right around the time they were sending the pharmacy bro, Martin Shkreli, to jail. And so I was reading up on that and he increased the price of this drug, Daraprim, I think it was like 7500% or increased a low cost drug to $7,500, one of those.
So I got a cold email from a Dr. Alex Oshmyancy, who’s my co-founder. He’s a radiologist by trade in a physicist and a smart mother fucker. And he had a pharmacy that he wanted to create a compounding pharmacy that would manufacture generic drugs that were in short supply because it happens all the time that things aren’t available. I’m like, you’re thinking too small. We should do something on a much bigger scale. And then it was right around the time they were sending the pharmacy bro, Martin Shkreli, to jail. And so I was reading up on that and he increased the price of this drug, Daraprim, I think it was like 7500% or increased a low cost drug to $7,500, one of those.
And I’m like, well, if he can just jack up the price to this drug and charge more and get away with it, this has to be an incredibly inefficient market. And so the question is why is he able to do it? And it was immediately apparent that it was a lack of transparency. And so can we start a company that is fully transparent with our costs, our markup and our selling price, and see if it works? And so we went for it and it took off immediately. I mean, you read a press release from a company saying they were creating a cost advantage program basically pretending to replicate us? We haven’t been in business two years. How insane is that?
Lex Fridman
Did you get a lot of pressure? I mean, I’m sure they’re very good at playing games, so cartel-type situations they protect. It feels like healthcare is very difficult to get in there.
Did you get a lot of pressure? I mean, I’m sure they’re very good at playing games, so cartel-type situations they protect. It feels like healthcare is very difficult to get in there.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, it does. And the whole industry is an arbitrage, but we don’t work inside the system. We work outside the system. And so we don’t work with those biggest companies, the biggest companies with the most dominant control. It’s very insulated and very controlled, like you said, we work outside them, we won’t work with them. And so because of that, we don’t have access to every medication because they’ve told a lot of the big brand manufacturers that if they work with us, they’ll take them off their formularies or change the rebate structure so that they won’t be prescribed as much.
Yeah, it does. And the whole industry is an arbitrage, but we don’t work inside the system. We work outside the system. And so we don’t work with those biggest companies, the biggest companies with the most dominant control. It’s very insulated and very controlled, like you said, we work outside them, we won’t work with them. And so because of that, we don’t have access to every medication because they’ve told a lot of the big brand manufacturers that if they work with us, they’ll take them off their formularies or change the rebate structure so that they won’t be prescribed as much.
Lex Fridman
That’s dark.
That’s dark.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, it is dark. But we’ll get past that, right? Because there’s a downstream impact of all this in the rebates and the greediness of those big three PBMs. When you go to a local pharmacy here in Austin, and let’s just say you have a friend here that is on Medicare or Medicare Advantage, and they go to a local pharmacy and they get a drug that costs $600. Well, in the insurance company, that $600, the pharmacy first buys that drug for probably that price, minus 5%. So $570. Then there’s probably a copay by the patient, and that’s probably $20. So now the net investment that the pharmacy, the local pharmacy has for that brand medication is $550. Where it gets really fucked up is those big three PBMs, they’re not reimbursing them $550 or more. They’re reimbursing them $500 or less. And literally those community pharmacies are eating that loss, and as a result, they’re going out of business left and right.
Yeah, it is dark. But we’ll get past that, right? Because there’s a downstream impact of all this in the rebates and the greediness of those big three PBMs. When you go to a local pharmacy here in Austin, and let’s just say you have a friend here that is on Medicare or Medicare Advantage, and they go to a local pharmacy and they get a drug that costs $600. Well, in the insurance company, that $600, the pharmacy first buys that drug for probably that price, minus 5%. So $570. Then there’s probably a copay by the patient, and that’s probably $20. So now the net investment that the pharmacy, the local pharmacy has for that brand medication is $550. Where it gets really fucked up is those big three PBMs, they’re not reimbursing them $550 or more. They’re reimbursing them $500 or less. And literally those community pharmacies are eating that loss, and as a result, they’re going out of business left and right.
And the most insane part of it is yes, with corporate employer insurance, that happens, but it happens more with Medicare Part D and Medicare Advantage. It happens all the time with those, almost with every script. So the government is complicit in these community pharmacies going out of business. So how does that connect to Cost Plus Drugs and what we’re doing and the big brands? The big brands know that if all these community pharmacies are going, tens of thousands of them are going to go out of business because of the way this pricing is, they’re going to lose a connection between their brand medications and grandma and grandpa and Aunt Sally and all that business is going to get transferred to the big companies and they’re going to have even less leverage. So they’re working with us to come up with programs that are very supportive of independent pharmacies, and that’s going to allow us to break the cartel because it’s in their best interest not to allow them to be so vertically integrated that they destroy the entire community and independent pharmacy industry.
Lex Fridman
Is there other aspects of the healthcare industry that could use this kind of transparency and revolutionizing?
Is there other aspects of the healthcare industry that could use this kind of transparency and revolutionizing?
Mark Cuban
Yes. Yeah. So what we’re going to do with our own healthcare, we’re not going to be in the business of selling healthcare or anything like that or operate, but the things we do for my companies, we’re only going to do deals with providers, healthcare providers, that allow us to be completely transparent. So that whatever contracts we do, we’re going to post them all. Whatever pricing we get, we’re going to post them all so that every company who’s our size or even bigger will have a template that they can work on, which will take it away from the big three insurance companies and the big three PBMs. Because now without that transparency, they have to use consultants who are getting paid by those big three, those big companies and aren’t giving them the best response. And so now that transparency will overcome that.
Yes. Yeah. So what we’re going to do with our own healthcare, we’re not going to be in the business of selling healthcare or anything like that or operate, but the things we do for my companies, we’re only going to do deals with providers, healthcare providers, that allow us to be completely transparent. So that whatever contracts we do, we’re going to post them all. Whatever pricing we get, we’re going to post them all so that every company who’s our size or even bigger will have a template that they can work on, which will take it away from the big three insurance companies and the big three PBMs. Because now without that transparency, they have to use consultants who are getting paid by those big three, those big companies and aren’t giving them the best response. And so now that transparency will overcome that.
Lex Fridman
And you’re using your, how should I say it, celebrity? Your name to push this forward?
And you’re using your, how should I say it, celebrity? Your name to push this forward?
Mark Cuban
Yeah, that’s why it’s the only company I’ve ever put my name on.
Yeah, that’s why it’s the only company I’ve ever put my name on.
Lex Fridman
It’s weird that people aren’t getting into this space. Public people, there’s not a big, you look at tech, there’s these CEOs are open and public and public and they’re pushing the company and they’re selling everything, and it’s all transparent. But you don’t see that in healthcare.
It’s weird that people aren’t getting into this space. Public people, there’s not a big, you look at tech, there’s these CEOs are open and public and public and they’re pushing the company and they’re selling everything, and it’s all transparent. But you don’t see that in healthcare.
Mark Cuban
No, because it’s a big business. And most people, if I was 25 trying to start a company, I’d work in the system. If I can build it up big enough, they would just buy me and I’d make money and buy a sports team, but I don’t need that money now.
No, because it’s a big business. And most people, if I was 25 trying to start a company, I’d work in the system. If I can build it up big enough, they would just buy me and I’d make money and buy a sports team, but I don’t need that money now.
AI
Lex Fridman
Let me ask you about AI. You got a little bit of an argument about open source. I think you stepped in between Vinod Khosla and Mark Andreessen. You think AI should be open sourced?
Let me ask you about AI. You got a little bit of an argument about open source. I think you stepped in between Vinod Khosla and Mark Andreessen. You think AI should be open sourced?
Mark Cuban
Yeah, for sure.
Yeah, for sure.
Lex Fridman
So all that discussion we’ve been having about Google and so on, one of the-
So all that discussion we’ve been having about Google and so on, one of the-
Mark Cuban
Well, they’re two different things, meaning that Meta is doing open source. That’s a good choice for them. I think that’s a smart choice, but it’s just a business decision for everybody else. I don’t think it should be forced.
Well, they’re two different things, meaning that Meta is doing open source. That’s a good choice for them. I think that’s a smart choice, but it’s just a business decision for everybody else. I don’t think it should be forced.
Lex Fridman
Forced, yes. And even Google’s open sourcing some of the models and-
Forced, yes. And even Google’s open sourcing some of the models and-
Mark Cuban
Because they’re all… That’s a very incestuous industry where the people all work together at some level. They read the same papers, they go to the same conferences. It’s like the early days of streaming and the internet where people used the same technology everywhere, and now they just try different things. And you get one smarter or a couple of smart people in one company like Anthropic, and they do things a little bit better and efficient, model efficiency gets better. So it’s just a business choice, but I don’t think it should be forced, but I think it’s a smart business decision.
Because they’re all… That’s a very incestuous industry where the people all work together at some level. They read the same papers, they go to the same conferences. It’s like the early days of streaming and the internet where people used the same technology everywhere, and now they just try different things. And you get one smarter or a couple of smart people in one company like Anthropic, and they do things a little bit better and efficient, model efficiency gets better. So it’s just a business choice, but I don’t think it should be forced, but I think it’s a smart business decision.
Lex Fridman
Open sourcing is a smart business decision.
Open sourcing is a smart business decision.
Mark Cuban
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
It’s a tricky one. I mean, Google is a pioneer in that with TensorFlow in the AI space. That’s a tricky decision to give-
It’s a tricky one. I mean, Google is a pioneer in that with TensorFlow in the AI space. That’s a tricky decision to give-
Mark Cuban
It really, really is, right?
It really, really is, right?
Lex Fridman
To give away the code.
To give away the code.
Mark Cuban
Go back to historically there was digital computing, which was a dominant player, and they thought, and IBM to a certain extent thought that they wouldn’t be subject to a problem with the PC industry. And then all of a sudden, with their mainframes and everything, they had captive software they wouldn’t use off the shelf software. So for a digital equipment mainframe or an IBM mainframe, you needed software that was written for it. There was nothing off the shelf. And when the PC industry came along, it was the exact opposite. There was MS-DOS and then Windows, things that were off the shelf that every PC could use. And that changed how people thought about software. And I think the same thing will happen here where it’s going to be as models become more efficient and easier and less expensive to train, I think there’ll be more reasons to open source.
Go back to historically there was digital computing, which was a dominant player, and they thought, and IBM to a certain extent thought that they wouldn’t be subject to a problem with the PC industry. And then all of a sudden, with their mainframes and everything, they had captive software they wouldn’t use off the shelf software. So for a digital equipment mainframe or an IBM mainframe, you needed software that was written for it. There was nothing off the shelf. And when the PC industry came along, it was the exact opposite. There was MS-DOS and then Windows, things that were off the shelf that every PC could use. And that changed how people thought about software. And I think the same thing will happen here where it’s going to be as models become more efficient and easier and less expensive to train, I think there’ll be more reasons to open source.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, that’s the hope. It creates more competition and a lot of different diversity of approaches in how they’re implemented deployed, what kind of products they create, all of that. Vinod compared to the danger of that to the Manhattan Project.
Yeah, that’s the hope. It creates more competition and a lot of different diversity of approaches in how they’re implemented deployed, what kind of products they create, all of that. Vinod compared to the danger of that to the Manhattan Project.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, I’m not buying that at all.
Yeah, I’m not buying that at all.
Lex Fridman
You don’t see the parallels between nuclear weapons and AI?
You don’t see the parallels between nuclear weapons and AI?
Mark Cuban
No, no. I think, I’m not an AI fatalist at all, right? I’m an AI optimist, but it’s not to say that there isn’t a lot of scary shit that can happen with it.
No, no. I think, I’m not an AI fatalist at all, right? I’m an AI optimist, but it’s not to say that there isn’t a lot of scary shit that can happen with it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Mark Cuban
Militarily. Like I said earlier, I’m a big believer that there’s going to be millions and tens of millions of models and people will take their expertise and either get hired for it and contribute or create their own models and license. So that you see now with this thing called mixture of experts where you connect things and people can take their expertise and we’ll be able to take that expertise and retain it in a way that they want to retain it. So I don’t think there’s going to be one medical database. I told this to people at a couple of big companies that were doing healthcare initiatives. Branding is so important in the healthcare space for hospitals, the Mayo Clinics, the MD Andersons, they’re huge brands. And I don’t think they’re just going to give up their expertise to some main singular model and say, okay, whatever expertise we have is available to you in Gemini or Chat GPT or so-and-so’s version of Meta’s open source. There’s just, that would be business suicide. And so I think you’re going to see each of them have their own models and update them as they go and license them.
Militarily. Like I said earlier, I’m a big believer that there’s going to be millions and tens of millions of models and people will take their expertise and either get hired for it and contribute or create their own models and license. So that you see now with this thing called mixture of experts where you connect things and people can take their expertise and we’ll be able to take that expertise and retain it in a way that they want to retain it. So I don’t think there’s going to be one medical database. I told this to people at a couple of big companies that were doing healthcare initiatives. Branding is so important in the healthcare space for hospitals, the Mayo Clinics, the MD Andersons, they’re huge brands. And I don’t think they’re just going to give up their expertise to some main singular model and say, okay, whatever expertise we have is available to you in Gemini or Chat GPT or so-and-so’s version of Meta’s open source. There’s just, that would be business suicide. And so I think you’re going to see each of them have their own models and update them as they go and license them.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and make money from the expertise.
Yeah, and make money from the expertise.
Mark Cuban
You have to. You have to.
You have to. You have to.
Advice for young people
Lex Fridman
You don’t give away messages. You have, yeah, any expertise evolves and growth and all that kind of stuff, and you want to own that growth. What advice would you give to young people? You have an exceptionally successful career. You came from little, made a lot. What advice would you give them?
You don’t give away messages. You have, yeah, any expertise evolves and growth and all that kind of stuff, and you want to own that growth. What advice would you give to young people? You have an exceptionally successful career. You came from little, made a lot. What advice would you give them?
Mark Cuban
Love your life. Find the things that you can enjoy. Be curious. You don’t have to have all the answers. When you’re 12, 15, I get emails from 13, 15-year-old kids, right?
Love your life. Find the things that you can enjoy. Be curious. You don’t have to have all the answers. When you’re 12, 15, I get emails from 13, 15-year-old kids, right?
Lex Fridman
What do I do?
What do I do?
Mark Cuban
What do I do? I feel like I’m being held back. I’m like a 15, you feel like you’re being held back? But just be curious because you don’t have to have the answers. You don’t have to know what you’re going to be when you grow up. I’m a hardcore believer that everybody has something that they’re really, really, really good at. That could be world-class, great. Every single human being on this planet. And the hard part is just finding what that is. And in some places having resources to enable it. But be curious so you can find out what it is. I took one technology class in college, Fortran programming, and I cheated on it, right?
What do I do? I feel like I’m being held back. I’m like a 15, you feel like you’re being held back? But just be curious because you don’t have to have the answers. You don’t have to know what you’re going to be when you grow up. I’m a hardcore believer that everybody has something that they’re really, really, really good at. That could be world-class, great. Every single human being on this planet. And the hard part is just finding what that is. And in some places having resources to enable it. But be curious so you can find out what it is. I took one technology class in college, Fortran programming, and I cheated on it, right?
I mean, it wasn’t until I got a job at Mellon Bank and I started learning how to program in this thing called Ramus, this scripting computing language that I realized, oh, this is interesting to me and I like it. And that’s what got me a job selling software and going on from there. You just don’t know what that’s going to be until you go out and experience different things. So for anybody young out there listening, enjoy your life. Find things to smile about, be curious, read, watch, expose yourself to as many different ideas as you can because something’s going to click at some point. You may be 15, you may be 25, you may be 55, but it can happen.
Lex Fridman
One thing to mention is sometimes it’s difficult or your parents, people around you might not be conducive or might not be of help in finding the thing you’re good at. In fact, in my own life, the society was such that, I don’t know if they’ve helped much at the thing I was good at. I’m still not sure what that is, but I think-
One thing to mention is sometimes it’s difficult or your parents, people around you might not be conducive or might not be of help in finding the thing you’re good at. In fact, in my own life, the society was such that, I don’t know if they’ve helped much at the thing I was good at. I’m still not sure what that is, but I think-
Mark Cuban
The interviewing done pretty well for you.
The interviewing done pretty well for you.
Lex Fridman
Well, it’s not even, there was a thing where I saw the beauty in people. Like I, very intensely. So you can call that empathy, all that kind of stuff.
Well, it’s not even, there was a thing where I saw the beauty in people. Like I, very intensely. So you can call that empathy, all that kind of stuff.
Mark Cuban
Someone called it wokeness.
Someone called it wokeness.
Lex Fridman
Super woke, I guess you could say, just super woke, that’s me. But in the education system I came up in, it was a very hard mathematics, science and so on, and it didn’t notice that whatever that was in me, but you have to keep the flame going. You have to try to find your way and see what that’s useful. And others around you might not always notice it. So it might take time. So it could be lonely. You can really have to find the strength to believe in yourself.
Super woke, I guess you could say, just super woke, that’s me. But in the education system I came up in, it was a very hard mathematics, science and so on, and it didn’t notice that whatever that was in me, but you have to keep the flame going. You have to try to find your way and see what that’s useful. And others around you might not always notice it. So it might take time. So it could be lonely. You can really have to find the strength to believe in yourself.
Mark Cuban
Oh, for sure. And I’ll tell you one quick story. 1992, I went to Moscow State University to teach kids how to start businesses. I had sold Micro Solutions and I wanted to travel, and I took Russian in high school. My Ruski is like [inaudible 02:09:04]-
Oh, for sure. And I’ll tell you one quick story. 1992, I went to Moscow State University to teach kids how to start businesses. I had sold Micro Solutions and I wanted to travel, and I took Russian in high school. My Ruski is like [inaudible 02:09:04]-
Lex Fridman
Good enough to remember that.
Good enough to remember that.
Mark Cuban
Yeah, right? Yeah. But it was interesting to me, and I bring it up because they didn’t know what the word profit meant. But at the same time, I would go around and meet people, and it was as entrepreneurial right after the Soviet Union fell, entrepreneurship went through the roof. A lot of it was mafia driven, but it was, people found that spark because I think that is natural. And so you just never know when and how and when the circumstances will come together for you to be able to take advantage.
Yeah, right? Yeah. But it was interesting to me, and I bring it up because they didn’t know what the word profit meant. But at the same time, I would go around and meet people, and it was as entrepreneurial right after the Soviet Union fell, entrepreneurship went through the roof. A lot of it was mafia driven, but it was, people found that spark because I think that is natural. And so you just never know when and how and when the circumstances will come together for you to be able to take advantage.
Lex Fridman
That spark is really important to comment on is in Russia and Ukraine, I think the system kind of suppresses that spark somehow. As you said you saw the natural entrepreneurship, but there’s not the entrepreneurial spirit once you grow up in both of the nations I mentioned. There is [inaudible 02:10:08]-
That spark is really important to comment on is in Russia and Ukraine, I think the system kind of suppresses that spark somehow. As you said you saw the natural entrepreneurship, but there’s not the entrepreneurial spirit once you grow up in both of the nations I mentioned. There is [inaudible 02:10:08]-
Mark Cuban
No, I believe it, right?
No, I believe it, right?
Lex Fridman
But there’s something about the system that-
But there’s something about the system that-
Mark Cuban
Without question.
Without question.
Lex Fridman
Be reasonable, be [inaudible 02:10:14]-
Be reasonable, be [inaudible 02:10:14]-
Mark Cuban
There would have been no reason for me to go over to do what I was doing if it was otherwise.
There would have been no reason for me to go over to do what I was doing if it was otherwise.
Lex Fridman
But, that’s the thing that really can help a country flourish.
But, that’s the thing that really can help a country flourish.
Mark Cuban
It’s going to be interesting with Ukraine if they’re able to survive this, because as horrific as it is, as you saw across Europe after World War II, the rebuilding creates opportunities.
It’s going to be interesting with Ukraine if they’re able to survive this, because as horrific as it is, as you saw across Europe after World War II, the rebuilding creates opportunities.
Lex Fridman
Rebuilding creates opportunities, but first, the war has to end. How that ends-
Rebuilding creates opportunities, but first, the war has to end. How that ends-
Mark Cuban
I don’t know either,
I don’t know either,
Lex Fridman
Is a really complex path. What gives you hope about the future of humanity?
Is a really complex path. What gives you hope about the future of humanity?
Mark Cuban
Just looking in my kids’ eyes, just talking to them and seeing their spirit, their friends’ spirit. And obviously we’re blessed as can be, right? And it’s not the same for every kid, but I get emails that I don’t respond to all of them, but from 13, 14, 15-year-old kids around the world, because Shark Tank’s shown everywhere asking me business questions. And it’s just like they took the time. They were that curious and that interested. And I see it when I talk to schools, when I go to different groups, that spark in kids’ eyes that there’s something bigger and better and exciting out there. And that’s not to say there’s not fear. Yeah, climate and any other number of things, but that’s the beauty of kids. And I think Gen Z really embodies that. And to me, that’s just really exciting.
Just looking in my kids’ eyes, just talking to them and seeing their spirit, their friends’ spirit. And obviously we’re blessed as can be, right? And it’s not the same for every kid, but I get emails that I don’t respond to all of them, but from 13, 14, 15-year-old kids around the world, because Shark Tank’s shown everywhere asking me business questions. And it’s just like they took the time. They were that curious and that interested. And I see it when I talk to schools, when I go to different groups, that spark in kids’ eyes that there’s something bigger and better and exciting out there. And that’s not to say there’s not fear. Yeah, climate and any other number of things, but that’s the beauty of kids. And I think Gen Z really embodies that. And to me, that’s just really exciting.
Lex Fridman
They dream. They dream big, they see the opportunity for making the world better. It’s cool. It’s cool to see young people in their eyes, that dream. And I could be the one to do it too, which is super powerful-
They dream. They dream big, they see the opportunity for making the world better. It’s cool. It’s cool to see young people in their eyes, that dream. And I could be the one to do it too, which is super powerful-
Mark Cuban
It’s funny because when I go talk to elementary school kids, one of the things I do, I said, okay, let’s look around. You see that light there one day, that light didn’t exist. Then somebody had the idea, then somebody created a product out of it, and now your school bought that. You see that chair? Chairs didn’t always look like that. Somebody had that idea. Why not you? So when you walk out and, what I make them do, ask yourself, why not me? Why can’t I be the one to change the world?
It’s funny because when I go talk to elementary school kids, one of the things I do, I said, okay, let’s look around. You see that light there one day, that light didn’t exist. Then somebody had the idea, then somebody created a product out of it, and now your school bought that. You see that chair? Chairs didn’t always look like that. Somebody had that idea. Why not you? So when you walk out and, what I make them do, ask yourself, why not me? Why can’t I be the one to change the world?
Lex Fridman
Thank you for that beautiful, hopeful message and thank you for talking today, Mark. You’re fun to follow. I’m a big fan of yours, but you’re also an important person in this world. I really appreciate everything you do.
Thank you for that beautiful, hopeful message and thank you for talking today, Mark. You’re fun to follow. I’m a big fan of yours, but you’re also an important person in this world. I really appreciate everything you do.
Mark Cuban
Well, I appreciate it. Thanks for saying that, Lex, and keep on doing what you’re doing. This was great. I really enjoyed this.
Well, I appreciate it. Thanks for saying that, Lex, and keep on doing what you’re doing. This was great. I really enjoyed this.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Mark Cuban. To support this podcast. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Oscar Wilde. Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he’s not, and a sense of humor was provided to console him for what he is. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Mark Cuban. To support this podcast. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Oscar Wilde. Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he’s not, and a sense of humor was provided to console him for what he is. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Dana White: UFC, Fighting, Khabib, Conor, Tyson, Ali, Rogan, Elon & Zuck | Lex Fridman Podcast #421
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #421 with Dana White.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
At the time, there was a stigma attached to the sport that these guys were despicable, disgusting human beings, which was the furthest thing from the truth. These kids had all gone to college, had college degrees, most of them because they wrestled in college. And we started to meet some of them. We loved the different stories. You had Chuck Liddell who had this mohawk, looks like an ax murderer, but graduated from Cal Poly with honors in accounting. Then you had Matt Hughes who was this farm boy, literally lived on a farm. And so there were all these cool stories with all these good people that weren’t what people thought they were. And Lorenzo and I always felt like there’s something here. If this thing was done the right way, this could be big.
And what was crazy was I was in a contract negotiation with Bob Meyrowitz, the old owner of the UFC over Tito’s contract and Chuck Liddell. They didn’t even want Chuck Liddell in the UFC.I was trying to get Chuck in the UFC and they didn’t even want him. And we got into this contract dispute over Tito’s contract and Bob Meyrowitz said, “You know what? There is no more money, okay? I don’t even know if I’ll even be able to put on one more event.” And he flipped out. When we hung up the phone, I literally picked up the phone and called Lorenzo and I said, “Hey, I just got off the phone with Bob Meyrowitz, the owner of the UFC, I think they’re in trouble and I think we could buy it and I think we should. You should reach out to him.” So Lorenzo called Meyrowitz, and I don’t remember the timeline, but within the next two months, we ended up owning the UFC for $2 million bucks.
We’re sitting in the venue that night, and I lean over to Lorenzo because the fight’s coming up. I go, wait till you see this interview with Baroni. They didn’t fucking do it. They didn’t do it. These guys were guys that were freelance guys that worked for Showtime at the time or something like that.
The difference between back then and now is I don’t have to do a bunch of the that I don’t really like to do, like budget meetings. I don’t like budget meetings. I sat through enough fucking budget meetings and… Horrible budget meetings. Horrible. We’re losing millions of dollars a year, and I’m in these budget meetings. So I get to pick and choose what I do these days. Back in the early days, you don’t get to pick and choose. You have to be involved in everything.
So I’ll tell you the story. So we buy the UFC. They’re based in New York. We’re moving the corporate offices to Vegas. So I have to fly out to New York, go into the offices and start going through everything and figuring out what needs to come back to Vegas and what we can just throw away. So they literally had a VHS machine and a TV, and there were a million tapes in this place, man. So I didn’t know what tapes were these definitely we have to keep, or these we don’t need. So I had to sit there and go through every single tape. And I popped in a tape and there was an interview on the Ivory Keenen Wayans show, the oldest Wayans brother, and he had a talk show at the time, and he had Joe Rogan, the guy from Fear Factor on the show, and he was promoting Fear Factor, but all he would talk about was UFC.
So when you see Joe Rogan on camera, and I was talking about the paid talking heads that they had in HBO boxing that were terrible, Joe Rogan does not come off as a paid talking head. He comes off as a guy who loves this. And so early on, no media would cover us. So I had to buy my way onto radio. So we’d do these radio tours, and they would drop us in. You’d have to get up at 3:30 in the morning in Vegas, on the west coast, because they’re at 6:30 in the morning in New York and Boston and Florida and all these other places. So they drop you into these markets to do radio, and the fighters were horrible at it. Fighters getting up at 3:30 in the morning, especially leading up to a fight, never good. They sound like they’re tired, they act like they’re tired, and they definitely act like they don’t want to be on there, and it’s bad radio. What you can’t have is bad radio. So the only two people that could pull off these radio tours were me and Joe Rogan. So me and Joe Rogan would alternate doing these radio tours all over the country.
Then the night you show up, I put on the best live event that I possibly can, and I put on the best television show that I possibly can. Once that door shuts, it’s all up to you. You determine whether you lose or not. And if you get into a position where you become so paranoid that you think that the powers that be here are against you, and you try to steer yourself away from certain fights… That’s one of the big things that happens in these other organizations. In these other organizations, the inmates run the asylum. So if they don’t want to fight bad enough, these other companies don’t push and they don’t do this and they don’t… We put on the best possible matchups that we can make.
And in this business, you might be an older fighter, but if you’re still ranked in the top 10, there’s young guys coming for you. Killers. Young killers are coming out and they want your position. So you being the veteran that you are have to prepare yourself to go in. And everybody was saying, when we made that fight with Saint-Denis that Poirier was in big trouble, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah. That’s awesome. That helps build the entire thing that Poirier, and then Poirier goes out and does what he did that night. That’s what makes fucking legends.
We go into Monday. It’s fight week. We got a whole list of things that we do fight week. And then you get right down to the press conference on Thursday, the weigh-ins on Friday, and then the fights on Saturday. Now my people fly back home, they go to bed on Sunday night, and it’s Groundhog Day. We wake up again on Monday and it starts all over again. Every weekend, every Saturday, for a year. So there’s lots of stories that need to be told, there’s lots of… When you think about what I compete with, whatever takes your attention on a Saturday night is my competitor.
Gustafsson took him into the deep water. Gustafsson hit him with some shit he’d never been hit with. Gustafsson tested him and put Jon Jones in a place where, I bet if you sat down and interviewed John Jones, going into the deep rounds of that, Jon Jones thought he was going to die. You know what I’m saying?
The other thing that Conor McGregor never did, no matter how big he was or whatever it was, and we were heading into a fight, “Oh, Conor, this guy just fell out. Aldo fell out. We’re looking for another,” “Yeah, I’ll do it, but I’m going to need another 200,000. I’m going to need another $1 million.” Conor McGregor never did that chicken shit, bullshit kind of stuff. He never did any of that. Conor was as solid a guy as you could possibly work with.
And I’ll call him on the phone as a friend and be like, “Hey, you good? How you doing?” Unfazed, unfazed like nothing’s going on. And then he’ll start talking to me about this and that and all this other. One time, there’s only been one time, I’ve never talked about this publicly, but one time I called him and he was not good. He was a mess. I’ve never heard him like that and I’ve never seen him like that. When Ivana died, the only time I’ve ever seen him fucked up. Obviously, as soon as I heard it, I reached out. And I have never, look at all the stuff that’s gone on with Trump, all the bad stuff that they say, they’re trying to attack him, they’re trying to ruin him, unfazed. I called him that day and it’s the first time I’ve ever seen that guy busted up and not good.
He loved everything. He became completely infatuated with the fight game. Then he became such a massive superstar, it’s almost like the whole thing starts to turn on you. All the things that come at you at a young age and that kind of money, it’s tough. It’s tough to navigate and get through. You say something like that and people are like, “Oh, poor him. He had fucking $100 million and couldn’t…” At that age and with all the shit that people talk and all the things that you got to put up with and the fame, a lot of people deal with fame, some people handle it really well and some people don’t. And the perfect example of that was Forrest Griffin and Stephan Bonner. They fought that unbelievable fight on the Ultimate Fighter. Everything blew up after that. Forrest dealt with fame really well and Stephan did not.
So we give them both contracts and the place erupts. It couldn’t have been a more perfect fight at the most perfect time. It all came together. It’s almost like this was meant to be. You know what I mean? Yeah. So we had so many problems with Spike TV at the time, because halfway through the season, the president of the company got fired. All the things that we thought we were going to get that year, we had this runaway hit show. And normally at that time when you would see runaway hit shows, there’d be commercials. It’d be on billboards. It’d be on the side of buses in L.A. and New York. We got none of that. We didn’t even know if we were going to get a second season coming out of that. And when that fight was over, I swear to God, I was like, “I don’t even give a fuck. We’re going to end up somewhere now after this fight.” And we didn’t even make it out of the building that night. The Spike guys did the contract with us in the alley on a fucking napkin after the fight.
And for people that are watching this, people that don’t know a lot about… Everybody thinks they know a lot about fighting. 99.9% of the people out there don’t know fucking jack shit about fighting or what it takes to do what these people do. But when you get into those later rounds and fatigue sets in, and then fatigue makes you start to fucking doubt yourself, and then you start to wonder, can I even make it through the rest of this round?
And then you start to think, am I going to fucking die right now? And these kids dig fucking deep. And they just, like you said, all the other shit flies out the window and now they’re just on fucking autopilot to fight and win. Those are definitely the best fights you’ll ever see in any combat sport.
And I make my way down to the Thai limit room. We start gambling. And I continue to drink having a blast. I end up leaving and going home that night, and I lost 80 grand. I wake up the next morning, I’m like, fuck. Those motherfuckers got me for 80,000 last night and dah, dah, dah, dah, dah.
I’m at work the next day and the host over there calls me and he says, “Hey, Dana, are you coming back? Do you still need the room that you guys had where you ate and all this shit you stay?” And I said, “No, I don’t need the room, but don’t get too comfortable with my fucking 80 grand. I’m coming back for it.”
Dead fucking silence on the other end of the phone. And he’s like, “Dana, you lost $3 million last night.” I said, “What the fuck are you talking about? I only have a million and a half dollar credit line.” He goes, “Yeah, you made us call the GM of the hotel and you started calling him a fucking pussy and da, da, da, da, da.” And I went, “Yeah, no, that sounds like something I would do. Yeah.”
And there’s lots of talk out there about my gambling, places that I’ve been kicked out of and things like that. And I do pretty well. I do pretty well, but it’s what I like to do. I don’t gamble in a way that I would ever hurt myself or hurt my family. I’m sure you’ve heard the Norm MacDonald stories. Norm MacDonald lost his entire personal wealth four times or something like that. Yeah, that’s not going to happen to me.
There’s a of people… When you gamble and you lose and you go into a deep, dark depression, I’ve seen this with guys that do it, get depressed. Gambling isn’t for you. If you are the type of person that’s on social media and people say horrible things to you and you get depressed and da, da, you shouldn’t be on social media. You know what I mean?
These are all part of being in the game. When you’re in the fucking game, great things happen and really bad things happen, and you got to take it all in stride. And you got to pick yourself up the next day, strap your fucking shoes back on and get out there and go to fucking war again. That’s how it works.
Every day when I get up out of bed, I strap up and I’m getting ready for fucking war. Because I know I’m coming in here. I know a bunch of bad shit’s going to happen that I’m going to have to fucking deal with. And if that’s not bad enough, when I finally get out of here, I’m probably going to go to the casino and I’m going to get into another fucking war. You know what I mean?
I thrive in chaos. I actually love chaos. Everybody talks about retiring. Fuck that shit. What am I going to do when I retire? What would I do? I like to go to war. I like to battle. I like to win. Sometimes I lose, but then I have to come back from the loss. And I love to build brands. I love to set short term and long-term goals and then knock them all down. This is just the stuff that excites me.
And whether it’s business or gambling. I like being a fan of things too. I like live music. When I find a band that I like, I get excited to go watch the band live or a Celtics game. I love the fucking Boston Celtics, and I love going to the games and watching them. This is the year. Hopefully we’re going to fucking win it this year. These are all things that make me happy and excite me in my life.
And it’s funny because there’s this post that I post maybe three, four nights a week. I also love this city. I can’t tell if the city of Las Vegas was built for me or I was built for this fucking city, but I love it. And there’s this turn on Summerlin Parkway every night, and it’s dark. And from there you can see the entire city, and it’s all fucking lights and it’s badass.
And I’m usually driving home after a fucking incredible day. This amazing day and this unbelievable fucking life I have, and I have this just moment of gratitude. Every time I take that turn and I’m like, God damn, I love this fucking city. And just every night when I go home, I’m just so happy and grateful for this life that I have.
But there’s all these little things in the movie that really lay out what life is all about. One of the parts is he’s in a class and the teacher’s talking about some poem. And he says, “What does this poem mean to you?” Well, this girl’s walking through the park and all the leaves are falling off the trees, and she realizes that she’s going to die someday. And that a lot of people think they have all this time so they fucking waste it, and they never go out and do what they really set out to do or accomplish or do anything great in their life. That’s one meaning.
Then he’s got the guy that he works with at work, he’s cutting weight and his nose is bleeding and all this shit. And this guy keeps going, “Why the fuck are you doing this? Pick that thing up and eat it like a fucking man. This is ridiculous. I don’t know why you’re doing this to yourself, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.” Then when he meets the girl and he gets to the point where he feels like he wants to quit, where does he go? He goes to that guy’s fucking apartment because he knows when he shows up at this guy’s apartment, he’s going to go, “Yeah, fuck this shit.”
No, he went to work. He went to work to talk to him, and he wasn’t at work. He took the night off. He shows up at the shitty little fucking apartment that the guy lives in and the guy’s putting a suit and tie on and shit. He’s like, “They said you called in sick. What’s going on?” He’s like, “Well, yeah. Aren’t you wrestling this guy tonight?” And he’s like, “Yeah, but why would you? You’re going to get docked a night’s pay and all this other shit.” He says, “You know what, man?” Then it all gets laid out. I get the goosebumps even telling you this fucking part of it.
The guy who’s been shitting on him the whole fucking time actually really respects him for what he’s done and sees what this kid is capable of doing and all this shit. This fucking movie spoke to me on so many different levels. And I think it’s probably the most underrated movie of all time when you really break down the meaning of what this movie is about. And it really fucking spoke to me.
And no matter where you are, if a fight breaks out, it creates this fucking energy, this buzz, this sense of fear. I mean, a lot of different emotions happen in people when fights break out. But one thing that is always the case, everybody’s watching, man. Everybody’s, fucking all of their eyes are on the fight.
I mean, we were just in Mexico, fucking fight broke out in the good seats right here with these seats that are super expensive. And security never fucking came. They just let these guys fight until they gassed out. And then everybody put their chairs back together and snapped back down and fucking. I literally got up from my table, walked over, and was watching this fight at the fights.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 0:57 – Mike Tyson and early days of fighting
- 11:35 – Jiu jitsu
- 17:39 – Origin of UFC
- 31:50 – Joe Rogan
- 37:56 – Lorenzo Fertitta
- 40:23 – Great fighters
- 44:20 – Khabib vs Conor
- 47:27 – Jon Jones
- 50:28 – Conor McGregor
- 55:31 – Trump
- 1:01:09 – Elon vs Zuck
- 1:02:30 – Mike Tyson vs Jake Paul
- 1:05:18 – Forrest Griffin vs Stephan Bonnar
- 1:12:31 – Gambling
- 1:27:33 – Mortality
Introduction
Dana White
Khabib beat Conor. Putin was on FaceTime before he even made it to the locker room. Trump sitting president, ex-president, watching all the fights calling, wants to talk about the fights. Valentina Shevchenko, every time she goes home, she meets with the president of the country. The list goes on and on and on. Elon Musk, Zuckerberg, I mean, the list goes on and on and on. The most powerful people in the world are all obsessed with fighting.
Khabib beat Conor. Putin was on FaceTime before he even made it to the locker room. Trump sitting president, ex-president, watching all the fights calling, wants to talk about the fights. Valentina Shevchenko, every time she goes home, she meets with the president of the country. The list goes on and on and on. Elon Musk, Zuckerberg, I mean, the list goes on and on and on. The most powerful people in the world are all obsessed with fighting.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Dana White, the president of the UFC, a mixed martial arts organization that revolutionized the art, the sport, and the business of fighting. And Dana is truly the mastermind behind the UFC. This is the Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Dana White. Do you remember when you saw your first fight?
The following is a conversation with Dana White, the president of the UFC, a mixed martial arts organization that revolutionized the art, the sport, and the business of fighting. And Dana is truly the mastermind behind the UFC. This is the Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Dana White. Do you remember when you saw your first fight?
Mike Tyson and early days of fighting
Dana White
I think so. I remember being at my grandmother’s house and I think it was an Ali fight, and all my uncles were going crazy during the fight, and there was just this buzz and this energy in the house that I liked at a very young age, and I’m pretty sure that was my first fight.
I think so. I remember being at my grandmother’s house and I think it was an Ali fight, and all my uncles were going crazy during the fight, and there was just this buzz and this energy in the house that I liked at a very young age, and I’m pretty sure that was my first fight.
Lex Fridman
Ali was something special.
Ali was something special.
Dana White
Yeah, incredible. I mean, when you look around, not just here in the office, but at my house, Ali and Tyson are everywhere.
Yeah, incredible. I mean, when you look around, not just here in the office, but at my house, Ali and Tyson are everywhere.
Lex Fridman
Would you put Ali as the greatest of all time boxing?
Would you put Ali as the greatest of all time boxing?
Dana White
Well, I would put Ali as the greatest of all time human being. I mean, it’s easy as a fight fan to focus on him as a fighter, but when you focus on him as a human and you think about what he meant at that time and place, the things he said, the poems he came up with, just the overall brilliance of Muhammad Ali. The guts to have the strength mentally, physically, and emotionally to go against the grain at the time that he did it. It was a very dangerous time for him to be who he was. Yet, because of how smart he was and because of his personality and how if you sat down with him, you could be the biggest racist on the planet, it’s hard to get in the room with Ali and not like Ali.
Well, I would put Ali as the greatest of all time human being. I mean, it’s easy as a fight fan to focus on him as a fighter, but when you focus on him as a human and you think about what he meant at that time and place, the things he said, the poems he came up with, just the overall brilliance of Muhammad Ali. The guts to have the strength mentally, physically, and emotionally to go against the grain at the time that he did it. It was a very dangerous time for him to be who he was. Yet, because of how smart he was and because of his personality and how if you sat down with him, you could be the biggest racist on the planet, it’s hard to get in the room with Ali and not like Ali.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, he’s all love, humor, all of it.
Yeah, he’s all love, humor, all of it.
Dana White
100%
100%
Lex Fridman
And had the guts in the ring and the guts to take a stand.
And had the guts in the ring and the guts to take a stand.
Dana White
100%
100%
Lex Fridman
When it was hard.
When it was hard.
Dana White
He might be one of the all time greatest humans. Just an impactful, powerful human being who happened to be a great boxer.
He might be one of the all time greatest humans. Just an impactful, powerful human being who happened to be a great boxer.
Lex Fridman
And sometimes the right moment meets the great human being. That’s important.
And sometimes the right moment meets the great human being. That’s important.
Dana White
I agree with you. And he was the right guy in the right place at the right time. And he’s also a guy who used his platform for all the right things.
I agree with you. And he was the right guy in the right place at the right time. And he’s also a guy who used his platform for all the right things.
Lex Fridman
So that might’ve been your first fight, but when did you fall in love with fighting? The art of it? The science of it?
So that might’ve been your first fight, but when did you fall in love with fighting? The art of it? The science of it?
Dana White
Yeah, I would say I really fell in love with it, so I was a senior. It was 1987 and Hagler Leonard happened, and I watched that fight and I taped it and I watched that fight like a million times. I was a huge, huge Hagler fan, and I like Sugar Ray Leonard too, but I was a huge Hagler fan. And I just remember I watched that fight a million times because I was pissed off and I felt like Haggler got robbed in the fight. But that was really what made me start to love the sport of boxing.
Yeah, I would say I really fell in love with it, so I was a senior. It was 1987 and Hagler Leonard happened, and I watched that fight and I taped it and I watched that fight like a million times. I was a huge, huge Hagler fan, and I like Sugar Ray Leonard too, but I was a huge Hagler fan. And I just remember I watched that fight a million times because I was pissed off and I felt like Haggler got robbed in the fight. But that was really what made me start to love the sport of boxing.
Lex Fridman
The battle of it.
The battle of it.
Dana White
Yeah. I was 17 and then after that, USA’s Tuesday Night Fights came out on television. It was on every Tuesday night. Religiously, never missed Tuesday Night Fights. I was there, watched all those fights. And a lot of the things you see in the UFC, not necessarily just the production, but I would say the feel and the style and all those things are all things that I loved about boxing and things that I hated about boxing, right down to the commentary.
Yeah. I was 17 and then after that, USA’s Tuesday Night Fights came out on television. It was on every Tuesday night. Religiously, never missed Tuesday Night Fights. I was there, watched all those fights. And a lot of the things you see in the UFC, not necessarily just the production, but I would say the feel and the style and all those things are all things that I loved about boxing and things that I hated about boxing, right down to the commentary.
Lex Fridman
You loved and hated?
You loved and hated?
Dana White
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Hated the commentary.
Hated the commentary.
Dana White
Certain things that I loved about boxing, I incorporated into the UFC. Things that I hated about boxing, I made sure that the UFC stayed far away from. I can’t stand Larry Merchant. Can’t stand Larry Merchant. And I used to watch HBO Boxing and mute the commentary so that I didn’t have to listen to them. Lampley too. You would spend this money for the pay-per-view to watch these people that you idolized to hear these idiots rip them apart while the fight was happening.
Certain things that I loved about boxing, I incorporated into the UFC. Things that I hated about boxing, I made sure that the UFC stayed far away from. I can’t stand Larry Merchant. Can’t stand Larry Merchant. And I used to watch HBO Boxing and mute the commentary so that I didn’t have to listen to them. Lampley too. You would spend this money for the pay-per-view to watch these people that you idolized to hear these idiots rip them apart while the fight was happening.
Lex Fridman
Oh they were criticizing them?
Oh they were criticizing them?
Dana White
100%.
100%.
Lex Fridman
Or taking them apart. I’ve gotten used to the UFC, so I’m trying to remember looking back.
Or taking them apart. I’ve gotten used to the UFC, so I’m trying to remember looking back.
Dana White
It was bad.
It was bad.
Lex Fridman
It was bad?
It was bad?
Dana White
It was really bad.
It was really bad.
Lex Fridman
But the sweet science, the art of boxing was beautiful still.
But the sweet science, the art of boxing was beautiful still.
Dana White
100%.
100%.
Lex Fridman
Like the stories you told.
Like the stories you told.
Dana White
I want to do this with you right now. Hey, will you bring your cell phone over here and pull up YouTube? I want to do this for you so that you can understand this and understand where I was coming from.
I want to do this with you right now. Hey, will you bring your cell phone over here and pull up YouTube? I want to do this for you so that you can understand this and understand where I was coming from.
Lex Fridman
For the commentary?
For the commentary?
Dana White
Yeah, at this point in time.
Yeah, at this point in time.
Lex Fridman
I have all good memories. You’re going to ruin it for me.
I have all good memories. You’re going to ruin it for me.
Dana White
Yeah, no, there are nothing but great memories about boxing, but the presentation and a lot of the things, but how fucking weird is it that I even cared about this shit at that point in my life and that time in my life? What impact could I possibly have on it? So think about Tyson and how much everybody loved Tyson at the time, and listen to this entrance.
Yeah, no, there are nothing but great memories about boxing, but the presentation and a lot of the things, but how fucking weird is it that I even cared about this shit at that point in my life and that time in my life? What impact could I possibly have on it? So think about Tyson and how much everybody loved Tyson at the time, and listen to this entrance.
Speaker 1
…Of the former undisputed heavyweight champion. And here he comes, Mike Tyson, as he heads toward the same ring he made his disgraceful exit in June of ’97.
…Of the former undisputed heavyweight champion. And here he comes, Mike Tyson, as he heads toward the same ring he made his disgraceful exit in June of ’97.
Lex Fridman
Wow.
Wow.
Speaker 1
…But proud.
…But proud.
Dana White
One of the baddest motherfucking walk-ins of all time, by the way.
One of the baddest motherfucking walk-ins of all time, by the way.
Lex Fridman
Look at that.
Look at that.
Dana White
So what this guy should be doing, and this is one of the Albert brothers, shut the fuck up. Stay out of the way.
So what this guy should be doing, and this is one of the Albert brothers, shut the fuck up. Stay out of the way.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, maybe build them up.
Yeah, maybe build them up.
Dana White
Or that. Or don’t say anything. Just let the fans… That’s why we watch it. That’s why we paid our money.
Or that. Or don’t say anything. Just let the fans… That’s why we watch it. That’s why we paid our money.
Lex Fridman
You don’t need to say anything.
You don’t need to say anything.
Speaker 1
Scary imposing music. Will he be able to intimidate his opponent tonight? Will it even matter? I really thought that’d be more of an explosion by the crowd here, but very mixed. Even with a win tonight, no matter how one sided, he will still have his detractors following the two fights. With Holyfield, his stock plummeted, the pundits came down hard feeling they were duped, that his knockouts were over second rate fighters. Now the crowd erupts more as he gets into the ring, but it’s certainly nothing overwhelming.
Scary imposing music. Will he be able to intimidate his opponent tonight? Will it even matter? I really thought that’d be more of an explosion by the crowd here, but very mixed. Even with a win tonight, no matter how one sided, he will still have his detractors following the two fights. With Holyfield, his stock plummeted, the pundits came down hard feeling they were duped, that his knockouts were over second rate fighters. Now the crowd erupts more as he gets into the ring, but it’s certainly nothing overwhelming.
Lex Fridman
What a dick. You’re right. I don’t remember that. You’re right.
What a dick. You’re right. I don’t remember that. You’re right.
Dana White
Imagine.
Imagine.
Lex Fridman
You’re right.
You’re right.
Dana White
Imagine you paid your money to watch Mike Tyson and you got to listen to these fucking jerkoffs talk shit about him the whole way to the… First of all, one of the coolest walk-ins ever. The first time anybody had heard DMX.
Imagine you paid your money to watch Mike Tyson and you got to listen to these fucking jerkoffs talk shit about him the whole way to the… First of all, one of the coolest walk-ins ever. The first time anybody had heard DMX.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, that’s right.
Yeah, that’s right.
Dana White
He’s walking into some scary imposing music. Will it even matter? It’s just all that stuff. I literally used to analyze every ounce of the production that would happen on television and at a time when I didn’t even know why I was doing it, but-
He’s walking into some scary imposing music. Will it even matter? It’s just all that stuff. I literally used to analyze every ounce of the production that would happen on television and at a time when I didn’t even know why I was doing it, but-
Lex Fridman
But it was in there somewhere. You were thinking about it.
But it was in there somewhere. You were thinking about it.
Dana White
Right? So yeah, I hated HBO commentary. I thought at the time, HBO Boxing was obviously the gold standard, but when you really think about boxing at that time, their production, the only thing that changed over 30 years was HD. I mean, even the commentators were the same for 30 years. And then you had the time when Larry Merchant gets up and literally starts fighting with Floyd Mayweather during the interview and says, “If I was 30 years younger, I’d kick your ass right now.”
Right? So yeah, I hated HBO commentary. I thought at the time, HBO Boxing was obviously the gold standard, but when you really think about boxing at that time, their production, the only thing that changed over 30 years was HD. I mean, even the commentators were the same for 30 years. And then you had the time when Larry Merchant gets up and literally starts fighting with Floyd Mayweather during the interview and says, “If I was 30 years younger, I’d kick your ass right now.”
Lex Fridman
Oh yeah, I remember that.
Oh yeah, I remember that.
Dana White
I mean, these are the interviews that we have to listen to when we’re trying to watch a boxing match?
I mean, these are the interviews that we have to listen to when we’re trying to watch a boxing match?
Lex Fridman
The level of boxing was good.
The level of boxing was good.
Dana White
Think about a fighter. A fighter has been gone for months away from their families and away from everything, training, cutting weight, sparring. Then they go in and they have to fight that night? And then if you watch your fight back, you got to listen to this bullshit from these guys? And then you get interviewed and your interview is this? It’s just…
Think about a fighter. A fighter has been gone for months away from their families and away from everything, training, cutting weight, sparring. Then they go in and they have to fight that night? And then if you watch your fight back, you got to listen to this bullshit from these guys? And then you get interviewed and your interview is this? It’s just…
Lex Fridman
And it’s not just about the pay-per-view money. It’s about these are legends of humanity.
And it’s not just about the pay-per-view money. It’s about these are legends of humanity.
Dana White
100%.
100%.
Lex Fridman
We should celebrate the highest form of accomplishment.
We should celebrate the highest form of accomplishment.
Dana White
100%.
100%.
Lex Fridman
Because these are Mike Tyson.
Because these are Mike Tyson.
Dana White
So you know who goes in there and interviews fighters? Joe Rogan, who has trained and done everything and has the utmost respect for the sport and the athletes. Or you got Daniel Cormier who was a former world champion himself and has actually been through it, done it, knows. And those are the type of people that we put in the booth, people that are actually experienced in it, not these people who’ve never been in a fight in their fucking life.
So you know who goes in there and interviews fighters? Joe Rogan, who has trained and done everything and has the utmost respect for the sport and the athletes. Or you got Daniel Cormier who was a former world champion himself and has actually been through it, done it, knows. And those are the type of people that we put in the booth, people that are actually experienced in it, not these people who’ve never been in a fight in their fucking life.
Lex Fridman
But they’re also, both DC and Rogan are big kids. They love it.
But they’re also, both DC and Rogan are big kids. They love it.
Dana White
100%.
100%.
Lex Fridman
They really love it.
They really love it.
Dana White
Well, everybody does. I mean, it’s the difference between our commentary and what I feel their commentary was. We don’t hire paid talking heads. We hire people that have actually been in it, done it, love it, and are super passionate about the sport. And I would say that none of them that ever covered the sport back then were. I don’t know if that was Marv Albert or what Albert brother that was, but he sounded like he’s a fan of the sport or? Anyway, you got me on this, and once I get on this, I lose my mind.
Well, everybody does. I mean, it’s the difference between our commentary and what I feel their commentary was. We don’t hire paid talking heads. We hire people that have actually been in it, done it, love it, and are super passionate about the sport. And I would say that none of them that ever covered the sport back then were. I don’t know if that was Marv Albert or what Albert brother that was, but he sounded like he’s a fan of the sport or? Anyway, you got me on this, and once I get on this, I lose my mind.
Lex Fridman
Maybe we wouldn’t have a UFC if they didn’t fuck it up so bad for the Tyson walk-up.
Maybe we wouldn’t have a UFC if they didn’t fuck it up so bad for the Tyson walk-up.
Dana White
It would be different. You’re not wrong. You’re not wrong. It would be different. There’s no doubt about it. All those experiences growing up being a boxing fan help create what the UFC is today.
It would be different. You’re not wrong. You’re not wrong. It would be different. There’s no doubt about it. All those experiences growing up being a boxing fan help create what the UFC is today.
Lex Fridman
It’s interesting because humans have been fighting for millennia, and it seems like with the UFC, the rate of innovation is just insane. In these last three decades, it seems like we’ve discovered how to do unarmed combat faster and better than any time in human history.
It’s interesting because humans have been fighting for millennia, and it seems like with the UFC, the rate of innovation is just insane. In these last three decades, it seems like we’ve discovered how to do unarmed combat faster and better than any time in human history.
Dana White
I agree with you 100%. The first UFC happened in 1993. Martial art versus martial art. And now over the last 30 years, martial arts has evolved faster than… And like you just said, combat sports, fighting, whatever you want to call it, martial arts, it has evolved so much in 30 years more than the last 300 years.
I agree with you 100%. The first UFC happened in 1993. Martial art versus martial art. And now over the last 30 years, martial arts has evolved faster than… And like you just said, combat sports, fighting, whatever you want to call it, martial arts, it has evolved so much in 30 years more than the last 300 years.
Jiu jitsu
Lex Fridman
What did you think when you saw UFC 1 with Hoist?
What did you think when you saw UFC 1 with Hoist?
Dana White
I remember everybody talking that this fight was going to happen and there was going to be no rules and all this other stuff. And we’re like, “There’s no way. That’s bullshit.” And then we ended up at some guy’s house that night in Boston and watching it and it was happening and it was fun and it was exciting and everything else. And then I fell off after that. The first one I watched, but I was too big of a boxing fan. Plus once grappling started taking over, and by grappling meaning the wrestling and the jiu-jitsu guys had just laid there, I completely lost interest. It’s funny that I’m having this conversation with you right now because I was out last night with my friends and we were talking about, because one of my buddies who’s a host here in town, just did jiu-jitsu for the first time.
I remember everybody talking that this fight was going to happen and there was going to be no rules and all this other stuff. And we’re like, “There’s no way. That’s bullshit.” And then we ended up at some guy’s house that night in Boston and watching it and it was happening and it was fun and it was exciting and everything else. And then I fell off after that. The first one I watched, but I was too big of a boxing fan. Plus once grappling started taking over, and by grappling meaning the wrestling and the jiu-jitsu guys had just laid there, I completely lost interest. It’s funny that I’m having this conversation with you right now because I was out last night with my friends and we were talking about, because one of my buddies who’s a host here in town, just did jiu-jitsu for the first time.
Lex Fridman
Nice.
Nice.
Dana White
…Yesterday. And he was like-
…Yesterday. And he was like-
Lex Fridman
Did he get his ass kicked?
Did he get his ass kicked?
Dana White
Yeah, yeah. But when you first go in, our first jiu-jitsu lesson, me, Lorenzo, and Frank was with John Lewis, and I remember thinking, “Holy shit, I can’t believe that I’m 28 years old and this is the first time I’m experiencing this, that another human being could do this to me on the ground.” It is such an eyeopening, mind blowing experience when you do it for the first time and then you become completely addicted to it. And we were training three, four days a week trying to kill each other, me and the Fertittas, and that’s how we fell in love with the sport. I think that first time that you do jiu-jitsu, it’s like the red pill and the blue pill in The Matrix. Do you want to believe that this is the world that you live in, or do you want to see what the real world looks like?
Yeah, yeah. But when you first go in, our first jiu-jitsu lesson, me, Lorenzo, and Frank was with John Lewis, and I remember thinking, “Holy shit, I can’t believe that I’m 28 years old and this is the first time I’m experiencing this, that another human being could do this to me on the ground.” It is such an eyeopening, mind blowing experience when you do it for the first time and then you become completely addicted to it. And we were training three, four days a week trying to kill each other, me and the Fertittas, and that’s how we fell in love with the sport. I think that first time that you do jiu-jitsu, it’s like the red pill and the blue pill in The Matrix. Do you want to believe that this is the world that you live in, or do you want to see what the real world looks like?
Lex Fridman
Just is a real red pill.
Just is a real red pill.
Dana White
It really is.
It really is.
Lex Fridman
You realize, “Holy shit, all that shit talking I’ve been doing about me being a badass,” you realize you’re not. You get dominated by another human being, you realize, “No.”
You realize, “Holy shit, all that shit talking I’ve been doing about me being a badass,” you realize you’re not. You get dominated by another human being, you realize, “No.”
Dana White
And I mean dominated. I mean completely treats you like you’re a little kid. And then we had the opportunity to roll with a lot of different guys at the time because of the whatever, and we don’t have a good relationship at all. But I’ll tell you this, Frank Shamrock came in one day and Frank Shamrock had me in side control. The pressure that this guy put on my chest made me tap. It felt like there was a car on my chest. And with zero effort from him, it was absolutely effortless. And when you train with somebody that’s at such a level when you’re not, it is the most humbling, mind blowing experience you can have, especially as a man, but as a human being.
And I mean dominated. I mean completely treats you like you’re a little kid. And then we had the opportunity to roll with a lot of different guys at the time because of the whatever, and we don’t have a good relationship at all. But I’ll tell you this, Frank Shamrock came in one day and Frank Shamrock had me in side control. The pressure that this guy put on my chest made me tap. It felt like there was a car on my chest. And with zero effort from him, it was absolutely effortless. And when you train with somebody that’s at such a level when you’re not, it is the most humbling, mind blowing experience you can have, especially as a man, but as a human being.
Lex Fridman
Just for fun, do you remember what your go-to submission was?
Just for fun, do you remember what your go-to submission was?
Dana White
Yeah, so when we first started out and started doing it, I had a pretty good guillotine in the beginning. So I’d catch a lot of people in guillotines.
Yeah, so when we first started out and started doing it, I had a pretty good guillotine in the beginning. So I’d catch a lot of people in guillotines.
Lex Fridman
So you’re okay being on bottom? So the guard was pretty good?
So you’re okay being on bottom? So the guard was pretty good?
Dana White
Yeah, I was okay with the bottom. I was comfortable there. But you know what I never liked? I never liked gi. We started fucking around with a gi in the beginning, that’s how we started. And then once I took the gi off, I felt like I had no submissions because I couldn’t grab onto anything. So after that, I went all no gi and I never wanted to wear a gi.
Yeah, I was okay with the bottom. I was comfortable there. But you know what I never liked? I never liked gi. We started fucking around with a gi in the beginning, that’s how we started. And then once I took the gi off, I felt like I had no submissions because I couldn’t grab onto anything. So after that, I went all no gi and I never wanted to wear a gi.
Lex Fridman
That’s fascinating because no gi has become big now and there’s a lot of interesting people. I got trained with Gordon Ryan, and the level there is just fascinating. It’s become the science and it looks like fighting now. It looks more like fighting as opposed to with the gi, sometimes it doesn’t quite look like fighting. And I feel like it’s transferable to actual MMA fighting, no gi stuff.
That’s fascinating because no gi has become big now and there’s a lot of interesting people. I got trained with Gordon Ryan, and the level there is just fascinating. It’s become the science and it looks like fighting now. It looks more like fighting as opposed to with the gi, sometimes it doesn’t quite look like fighting. And I feel like it’s transferable to actual MMA fighting, no gi stuff.
Dana White
Or street.
Or street.
Lex Fridman
Street, yeah.
Street, yeah.
Dana White
I mean, if you start off in your first year you’re in a gi, man, you better hope guy’s got winter jackets on or something if something happens in the street because, I know all the jiu-jitsu fucking people are going to go crazy over this, but in my opinion, no gi is way better than gi.
I mean, if you start off in your first year you’re in a gi, man, you better hope guy’s got winter jackets on or something if something happens in the street because, I know all the jiu-jitsu fucking people are going to go crazy over this, but in my opinion, no gi is way better than gi.
Lex Fridman
That said, I also do judo. So in the street scenario, if you’re comfortable on the feet and you can clinch and you can throw, because most of us wear clothing, especially in Boston in the winter setting, so if you’re comfortable on the feet, you could still do well. The problem with jiu-jitsu is most people are not comfortable on the feet, the sports jiu-jitsu. Most people want to get to the ground as quickly as possible. So what’d you think of Hoist at that time in the early… Because it blew a lot of people’s minds that there’s more to this puzzle.
That said, I also do judo. So in the street scenario, if you’re comfortable on the feet and you can clinch and you can throw, because most of us wear clothing, especially in Boston in the winter setting, so if you’re comfortable on the feet, you could still do well. The problem with jiu-jitsu is most people are not comfortable on the feet, the sports jiu-jitsu. Most people want to get to the ground as quickly as possible. So what’d you think of Hoist at that time in the early… Because it blew a lot of people’s minds that there’s more to this puzzle.
Dana White
100%, and the fact that you had these guys like Ken Shamrock that were jacked and you had all these wrestlers or the big massive guys that they had in the different weight classes, and this skinny little dude like Hoist was out there beating everybody. I mean, if you look at the way the Gracie’s played that, you couldn’t have had a better advertisement for Gracie Jiu-jitsu at the time.
100%, and the fact that you had these guys like Ken Shamrock that were jacked and you had all these wrestlers or the big massive guys that they had in the different weight classes, and this skinny little dude like Hoist was out there beating everybody. I mean, if you look at the way the Gracie’s played that, you couldn’t have had a better advertisement for Gracie Jiu-jitsu at the time.
Lex Fridman
But also for MMA, because there’s just a lot of surprising elements. A lot of people’s prediction was wrong. They didn’t think the skinny guy would win. And they’re like, “Oh shit, there’s more to this.”
But also for MMA, because there’s just a lot of surprising elements. A lot of people’s prediction was wrong. They didn’t think the skinny guy would win. And they’re like, “Oh shit, there’s more to this.”
Dana White
What’s the real beautiful thing about jiu-jitsu? It’s like when you talk about if you wanted to get your daughter into a martial art, “Should I put my daughter into karate or should I put her into this?” You put your daughter into jiu-jitsu 100% because it’s not about size or strength, it’s about technique. And you give your daughter a bunch of jiu-jitsu and a little bit of Muay Thai.
What’s the real beautiful thing about jiu-jitsu? It’s like when you talk about if you wanted to get your daughter into a martial art, “Should I put my daughter into karate or should I put her into this?” You put your daughter into jiu-jitsu 100% because it’s not about size or strength, it’s about technique. And you give your daughter a bunch of jiu-jitsu and a little bit of Muay Thai.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, she becomes dangerous.
Yeah, she becomes dangerous.
Dana White
It’s like the perfect combo. Because you can put your son into anything. Your son can get into some… Boys are going to learn how to fight and they’re going to do whatever. But girls are different. And the other thing, I mean, this is the biggest selling point for jiu-jitsu for women. I mean, when a woman, no matter how big, how small can put a guy to sleep in three and a half seconds.
It’s like the perfect combo. Because you can put your son into anything. Your son can get into some… Boys are going to learn how to fight and they’re going to do whatever. But girls are different. And the other thing, I mean, this is the biggest selling point for jiu-jitsu for women. I mean, when a woman, no matter how big, how small can put a guy to sleep in three and a half seconds.
Origin of UFC
Lex Fridman
What’s the origin story of the UFC as it is today as you’ve created it and you and Lorenzo and Fertitta brothers built it?
What’s the origin story of the UFC as it is today as you’ve created it and you and Lorenzo and Fertitta brothers built it?
Dana White
It started with John Lewis and seeing him. Frank and I were out one night at the Hard Rock and John Lewis was there and he’s like, “Oh, that’s that ultimate fighting guy.” And I was like, ” I know him.” And Frank’s like, “I’ve always wanted to learn ground fighting.” And I said, “Yeah, I’m interested in it too.” So we went over, we talked to John Lewis and we made an appointment to wrestle with him on Monday. And we told Lorenzo and Lorenzo came with us. And that was the beginning of the end. I mean, we started doing jiu-jitsu and started to meet a lot of the fighters.
It started with John Lewis and seeing him. Frank and I were out one night at the Hard Rock and John Lewis was there and he’s like, “Oh, that’s that ultimate fighting guy.” And I was like, ” I know him.” And Frank’s like, “I’ve always wanted to learn ground fighting.” And I said, “Yeah, I’m interested in it too.” So we went over, we talked to John Lewis and we made an appointment to wrestle with him on Monday. And we told Lorenzo and Lorenzo came with us. And that was the beginning of the end. I mean, we started doing jiu-jitsu and started to meet a lot of the fighters.
At the time, there was a stigma attached to the sport that these guys were despicable, disgusting human beings, which was the furthest thing from the truth. These kids had all gone to college, had college degrees, most of them because they wrestled in college. And we started to meet some of them. We loved the different stories. You had Chuck Liddell who had this mohawk, looks like an ax murderer, but graduated from Cal Poly with honors in accounting. Then you had Matt Hughes who was this farm boy, literally lived on a farm. And so there were all these cool stories with all these good people that weren’t what people thought they were. And Lorenzo and I always felt like there’s something here. If this thing was done the right way, this could be big.
And what was crazy was I was in a contract negotiation with Bob Meyrowitz, the old owner of the UFC over Tito’s contract and Chuck Liddell. They didn’t even want Chuck Liddell in the UFC.I was trying to get Chuck in the UFC and they didn’t even want him. And we got into this contract dispute over Tito’s contract and Bob Meyrowitz said, “You know what? There is no more money, okay? I don’t even know if I’ll even be able to put on one more event.” And he flipped out. When we hung up the phone, I literally picked up the phone and called Lorenzo and I said, “Hey, I just got off the phone with Bob Meyrowitz, the owner of the UFC, I think they’re in trouble and I think we could buy it and I think we should. You should reach out to him.” So Lorenzo called Meyrowitz, and I don’t remember the timeline, but within the next two months, we ended up owning the UFC for $2 million bucks.
Lex Fridman
And you’ve said that you fought a lot of battles during that time.
And you’ve said that you fought a lot of battles during that time.
Dana White
I mean, the early days of building this company and building the sport, it was the wild, wild west, man. It was crazy back then. I was literally at war every day with all different types of people. Plus traditionally, there’s bad people that are involved in fighting, man, there’s lots of bad people. And we had to sift our way through that for the first seven, eight years.
I mean, the early days of building this company and building the sport, it was the wild, wild west, man. It was crazy back then. I was literally at war every day with all different types of people. Plus traditionally, there’s bad people that are involved in fighting, man, there’s lots of bad people. And we had to sift our way through that for the first seven, eight years.
Lex Fridman
So in general, there’s corruption that people steal money. They’re thinking just about themselves, not the bigger business.
So in general, there’s corruption that people steal money. They’re thinking just about themselves, not the bigger business.
Dana White
Let me tell you about this. I mean, I want to say it was the Netherlands. I don’t remember exactly where. It could have been Amsterdam. I mean, MMA promoters were like car bombing each other, and then the other guy shot up the other guy’s house with machine guns and that’s the kind of shit that was going on. I’ll tell you the story. So Affliction, do you remember Affliction?
Let me tell you about this. I mean, I want to say it was the Netherlands. I don’t remember exactly where. It could have been Amsterdam. I mean, MMA promoters were like car bombing each other, and then the other guy shot up the other guy’s house with machine guns and that’s the kind of shit that was going on. I’ll tell you the story. So Affliction, do you remember Affliction?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Dana White
So there was a guy, I want to say his name was Todd Beard or something like that. This guy used to text me every day when they started their MMA thing telling me he was going to kill me.
So there was a guy, I want to say his name was Todd Beard or something like that. This guy used to text me every day when they started their MMA thing telling me he was going to kill me.
Lex Fridman
Legitimately, that’s what-
Legitimately, that’s what-
Dana White
Legitimately going to kill me. “You punk motherfucker. I’m going to fucking kill you. You don’t understand who I am and what I’ve done,” and this and that. I think this guy would get drunk or do drugs every night or whatever his deal was. This guy would call me, text me, and threaten my life every day. I used to go, “Fuck you,” and this and that.
Legitimately going to kill me. “You punk motherfucker. I’m going to fucking kill you. You don’t understand who I am and what I’ve done,” and this and that. I think this guy would get drunk or do drugs every night or whatever his deal was. This guy would call me, text me, and threaten my life every day. I used to go, “Fuck you,” and this and that.
Lex Fridman
You said, “Fuck you” to that guy?
You said, “Fuck you” to that guy?
Dana White
Oh yeah, man. Especially back then. But I mean, this is the type of shit that went on in the early days. This guy who was one of the owners of Affliction was not a good human, let’s put it that way.
Oh yeah, man. Especially back then. But I mean, this is the type of shit that went on in the early days. This guy who was one of the owners of Affliction was not a good human, let’s put it that way.
Lex Fridman
What about the business side of it? It’s tough to make money in this business.
What about the business side of it? It’s tough to make money in this business.
Dana White
Yeah, we weren’t making money, so trying to build this thing corrupt. The guys that worked for In Demand pay-per-view at the time were not good dudes and that thing was a fucking total monopoly. God, I wish I could remember his name right now. He used to run In Demand and he was a fucking bad guy. Then he comes over and starts running DirecTV, who we always had a great relationship with and he’s the reason we left DirecTV and said, “Fuck it. We’ll just go streaming then.” I don’t remember his name. I’d have to ask Lorenzo.
Yeah, we weren’t making money, so trying to build this thing corrupt. The guys that worked for In Demand pay-per-view at the time were not good dudes and that thing was a fucking total monopoly. God, I wish I could remember his name right now. He used to run In Demand and he was a fucking bad guy. Then he comes over and starts running DirecTV, who we always had a great relationship with and he’s the reason we left DirecTV and said, “Fuck it. We’ll just go streaming then.” I don’t remember his name. I’d have to ask Lorenzo.
Lex Fridman
So in general, just in this whole space, there’s a lot of shady people?
So in general, just in this whole space, there’s a lot of shady people?
Dana White
Everybody you deal with, you’re dealing with a lot of different forces and your hands are in a lot of different businesses. From the venue business to the merchandise business to the video game business, the pay-per-view business, the list goes on and on of all the different types of… The production…
Everybody you deal with, you’re dealing with a lot of different forces and your hands are in a lot of different businesses. From the venue business to the merchandise business to the video game business, the pay-per-view business, the list goes on and on of all the different types of… The production…
Dana White
The list goes on and on of all the different types of the production business, of all these different… When I first started this, we had a production team that was the production team that was in it before we bought it. So there was this incident with Phil Baroni, where Phil Baroni, we did an interview with him, and Baroni flips out in the interview when they’re interviewing him and goes crazy. And I thought it was awesome. So I’m like, “We’re going to leave this in. We’re going to leave this interview in.” And the production guys were arguing with me. They’re like, “We can’t leave this in. This is totally unprofessional.” I said, “I don’t give a shit. This is what we’re doing. We’re going to do this and clip it like this and do it like that.”
The list goes on and on of all the different types of the production business, of all these different… When I first started this, we had a production team that was the production team that was in it before we bought it. So there was this incident with Phil Baroni, where Phil Baroni, we did an interview with him, and Baroni flips out in the interview when they’re interviewing him and goes crazy. And I thought it was awesome. So I’m like, “We’re going to leave this in. We’re going to leave this interview in.” And the production guys were arguing with me. They’re like, “We can’t leave this in. This is totally unprofessional.” I said, “I don’t give a shit. This is what we’re doing. We’re going to do this and clip it like this and do it like that.”
We’re sitting in the venue that night, and I lean over to Lorenzo because the fight’s coming up. I go, wait till you see this interview with Baroni. They didn’t fucking do it. They didn’t do it. These guys were guys that were freelance guys that worked for Showtime at the time or something like that.
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 00:24:03].
[inaudible 00:24:03].
Dana White
I literally got up from my fucking seat, went back there, kicked the fucking door of the truck open, and I said, “You motherfuckers. You ever do that again and I’ll fire every one of you.” Let’s just put it this way. I ended up firing every one of them anyway and going with a whole new crew. But these were the type of things that early on… There’s so much stuff. I mean, I could sit here for three days and walk you through all the stuff that used to go on back in those days. But it was the Wild Wild West, man.
I literally got up from my fucking seat, went back there, kicked the fucking door of the truck open, and I said, “You motherfuckers. You ever do that again and I’ll fire every one of you.” Let’s just put it this way. I ended up firing every one of them anyway and going with a whole new crew. But these were the type of things that early on… There’s so much stuff. I mean, I could sit here for three days and walk you through all the stuff that used to go on back in those days. But it was the Wild Wild West, man.
Lex Fridman
But how’d you figure out, how’d you know how to deal with all this mess? First of all, to fire people, to fire people that aren’t doing a good job, all of that. How to be a leader, how to be a…
But how’d you figure out, how’d you know how to deal with all this mess? First of all, to fire people, to fire people that aren’t doing a good job, all of that. How to be a leader, how to be a…
Dana White
Well, that’s the thing too.
Well, that’s the thing too.
Lex Fridman
… business leader.
… business leader.
Dana White
In the early days, there was two employees, me and another girl that worked for me, for my company before I started doing this, and then we slowly started to bring people on and you started to build a team. And then before you know it, we had 10 people. We used to do our Christmas parties back then too. There’d be eight to ten people at our Christmas party. But a lot of it is, you’ll learn as you go. You know what me and the Fertittas knew about production when we bought this UFC? I want to say we had two or three weeks to pull off an event. This is what we knew about production.
In the early days, there was two employees, me and another girl that worked for me, for my company before I started doing this, and then we slowly started to bring people on and you started to build a team. And then before you know it, we had 10 people. We used to do our Christmas parties back then too. There’d be eight to ten people at our Christmas party. But a lot of it is, you’ll learn as you go. You know what me and the Fertittas knew about production when we bought this UFC? I want to say we had two or three weeks to pull off an event. This is what we knew about production.
Lex Fridman
Really?
Really?
Dana White
Jack shit. So we had to dive in and we had to learn it. We had to figure it out, and we knew what we wanted. We knew what we liked. We knew what we were looking for. It’s just about building a good team, and I think that’s one of the things, if you want to talk about what I’ve accomplished in the last 25 years of my life, I’ve been really good at building teams.
Jack shit. So we had to dive in and we had to learn it. We had to figure it out, and we knew what we wanted. We knew what we liked. We knew what we were looking for. It’s just about building a good team, and I think that’s one of the things, if you want to talk about what I’ve accomplished in the last 25 years of my life, I’ve been really good at building teams.
Lex Fridman
Already have a vision of what you want the final thing to look like, and then build a team that can bring that to life.
Already have a vision of what you want the final thing to look like, and then build a team that can bring that to life.
Dana White
A hundred percent. Well, you have to have the vision. Without the vision, there’s nothing. So that’s sort of what I do. I am the vision part of this thing. We’re going to open a PI in Mexico, we’re going to do this, we’re going to do that. And then you build the team to come in and help execute.
A hundred percent. Well, you have to have the vision. Without the vision, there’s nothing. So that’s sort of what I do. I am the vision part of this thing. We’re going to open a PI in Mexico, we’re going to do this, we’re going to do that. And then you build the team to come in and help execute.
Lex Fridman
A lot of people that do fighting promotions fail. You succeeded against the long odds. What’s the secret to your success, if you would, just looking back over the years?
A lot of people that do fighting promotions fail. You succeeded against the long odds. What’s the secret to your success, if you would, just looking back over the years?
Dana White
Well, the secret to success, I would say, first of all is passion and consistency. You have to love what you do. You have to get up every day. And I get here every day at 9:30 in the morning. When we sold in 2016, a lot of people in the company made a lot of money, and they all took off and they retired. Other than the Fertittas, I made the most money. I’m still here. I get here at 9:30 every morning. Last night I left here at 8:30. And I don’t know how late I’m going to be here tonight, but I love what I do. We get up every day and grind. I work just as hard now as I did back then.
Well, the secret to success, I would say, first of all is passion and consistency. You have to love what you do. You have to get up every day. And I get here every day at 9:30 in the morning. When we sold in 2016, a lot of people in the company made a lot of money, and they all took off and they retired. Other than the Fertittas, I made the most money. I’m still here. I get here at 9:30 every morning. Last night I left here at 8:30. And I don’t know how late I’m going to be here tonight, but I love what I do. We get up every day and grind. I work just as hard now as I did back then.
The difference between back then and now is I don’t have to do a bunch of the that I don’t really like to do, like budget meetings. I don’t like budget meetings. I sat through enough fucking budget meetings and… Horrible budget meetings. Horrible. We’re losing millions of dollars a year, and I’m in these budget meetings. So I get to pick and choose what I do these days. Back in the early days, you don’t get to pick and choose. You have to be involved in everything.
Lex Fridman
So cost, you’re just looking at cost and stuff.
So cost, you’re just looking at cost and stuff.
Dana White
A hundred percent. You literally go through line by line, every fucking number in the company and where did the money go and how can we save costs? How can we do this better? How can we… They are brutal, and there are multiple times a week and-
A hundred percent. You literally go through line by line, every fucking number in the company and where did the money go and how can we save costs? How can we do this better? How can we… They are brutal, and there are multiple times a week and-
Lex Fridman
Probably helps to deeply appreciate how much this shit costs though.
Probably helps to deeply appreciate how much this shit costs though.
Dana White
A hundred percent. Well, you have to know that. In the early days when you start your business, you have these people, who, when I hear them say, “You know what? I want to work for myself. I want to create my own schedule, and I want to do all the…” If that’s your thought process going into it, you’re never going to be successful. You have to pay attention to every single detail of the business early on. You’re involved in everything. There’s no days off, there’s no birthdays, there’s no Christmas, there’s none of that shit. I literally moved the birth of my second son for a Chuck Liddell fight. We had a Chuck Liddell fight coming up and they’re like, “Yeah, your son’s going to be born on this date.” And I’m like, “Yeah, that’s not going to work. We’re going to have to take him earlier. So they literally gave my wife a C-section and took my son early.
A hundred percent. Well, you have to know that. In the early days when you start your business, you have these people, who, when I hear them say, “You know what? I want to work for myself. I want to create my own schedule, and I want to do all the…” If that’s your thought process going into it, you’re never going to be successful. You have to pay attention to every single detail of the business early on. You’re involved in everything. There’s no days off, there’s no birthdays, there’s no Christmas, there’s none of that shit. I literally moved the birth of my second son for a Chuck Liddell fight. We had a Chuck Liddell fight coming up and they’re like, “Yeah, your son’s going to be born on this date.” And I’m like, “Yeah, that’s not going to work. We’re going to have to take him earlier. So they literally gave my wife a C-section and took my son early.
Lex Fridman
You were all in.
You were all in.
Dana White
All in. Yeah.
All in. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
And the fascinating thing, like you said, you’ve said that you could care less about money. You’re doing this for the love of it.
And the fascinating thing, like you said, you’ve said that you could care less about money. You’re doing this for the love of it.
Dana White
Yeah, I was doing this when I was broke, and I’m doing this now when I’m not broke. I’m doing this because I love it. And I feel like there’s so much more to do, and this is truly my passion in life. It’s like the Sphere. We’re doing the Sphere? Why? Why would I do the Sphere? It’s going to cost me a bunch of money. It’s really challenging. Most people think it can’t be pulled off, and you’re looking at weird angles, different things going on inside other than the fight and all this other stuff. But yeah, I’m doing it because it’s awesome and it’s challenging and it’s hard, and I think that if anybody can do it right, it’s us. So why not take that challenge?
Yeah, I was doing this when I was broke, and I’m doing this now when I’m not broke. I’m doing this because I love it. And I feel like there’s so much more to do, and this is truly my passion in life. It’s like the Sphere. We’re doing the Sphere? Why? Why would I do the Sphere? It’s going to cost me a bunch of money. It’s really challenging. Most people think it can’t be pulled off, and you’re looking at weird angles, different things going on inside other than the fight and all this other stuff. But yeah, I’m doing it because it’s awesome and it’s challenging and it’s hard, and I think that if anybody can do it right, it’s us. So why not take that challenge?
Lex Fridman
It’s actually why I’m here. I’m going to the Sphere for the first time because I’m hanging out with Darren Aronofsky who put together the thing that’s in there now, and I can’t believe you’re thinking of… I don’t know how you’re going to solve that puzzle.
It’s actually why I’m here. I’m going to the Sphere for the first time because I’m hanging out with Darren Aronofsky who put together the thing that’s in there now, and I can’t believe you’re thinking of… I don’t know how you’re going to solve that puzzle.
Dana White
There’s many puzzles to solve for this one. Many puzzles.
There’s many puzzles to solve for this one. Many puzzles.
Lex Fridman
Can you speak to that? What are interesting challenges that you’re encountering?
Can you speak to that? What are interesting challenges that you’re encountering?
Dana White
Yeah, so there’s a lot. So you have the octagon and then behind it is the world’s biggest screen, ever. So what is the theme? How do you program it? First of all, it’s super expensive to shoot, and the format for the Sphere, angles. We were talking about today. I just had a big meeting today about the Sphere this afternoon, and making sure that all my departments, all the details that I want all start to come together here in the next two weeks. I want the creative, the commercial. I have some goals. I will tell people as we get closer what I’m looking to achieve with this other than putting on one of the greatest, most unique sporting events of all time, and probably the greatest combat sporting event of all time. But yeah, there’s challenges. There’s a laundry list of challenges for this thing, and not to mention the fact that it’s on Mexican Independence Day, and we’re going to weave in the whole history of combat in Mexico-
Yeah, so there’s a lot. So you have the octagon and then behind it is the world’s biggest screen, ever. So what is the theme? How do you program it? First of all, it’s super expensive to shoot, and the format for the Sphere, angles. We were talking about today. I just had a big meeting today about the Sphere this afternoon, and making sure that all my departments, all the details that I want all start to come together here in the next two weeks. I want the creative, the commercial. I have some goals. I will tell people as we get closer what I’m looking to achieve with this other than putting on one of the greatest, most unique sporting events of all time, and probably the greatest combat sporting event of all time. But yeah, there’s challenges. There’s a laundry list of challenges for this thing, and not to mention the fact that it’s on Mexican Independence Day, and we’re going to weave in the whole history of combat in Mexico-
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Nice.
Yeah. Nice.
Dana White
… into this event.
… into this event.
Lex Fridman
But the production, this is hilarious, because you were just talking about knowing nothing about production, so many years ago.
But the production, this is hilarious, because you were just talking about knowing nothing about production, so many years ago.
Dana White
And now tackling the Sphere, yeah.
And now tackling the Sphere, yeah.
Lex Fridman
The hardest production effort.
The hardest production effort.
Dana White
Ever.
Ever.
Lex Fridman
And that will be live?
And that will be live?
Dana White
It’ll be live. It’ll be live on pay-per-view, it’ll be live in the arena, and it’ll also be in movie theaters.
It’ll be live. It’ll be live on pay-per-view, it’ll be live in the arena, and it’ll also be in movie theaters.
Lex Fridman
Nice. So it will be shown at the Sphere later too? Will you try to create an experience?
Nice. So it will be shown at the Sphere later too? Will you try to create an experience?
Dana White
ESPN’s doing a doc on it.
ESPN’s doing a doc on it.
Lex Fridman
Nice.
Nice.
Dana White
The making of the Sphere. Yeah.
The making of the Sphere. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Well, you’re feeling good about it?
Well, you’re feeling good about it?
Dana White
Oh, yeah. I feel incredible about it. I can’t wait. It’s going to be fun.
Oh, yeah. I feel incredible about it. I can’t wait. It’s going to be fun.
Lex Fridman
I can’t wait to see how you solve the puzzle.
I can’t wait to see how you solve the puzzle.
Joe Rogan
Dana White
Thank you.
Thank you.
Lex Fridman
Another guy that I feel like could care less about the money is Joe Rogan. How important is he to the UFC, to the rise of the UFC, and what in general do you love about Joe?
Another guy that I feel like could care less about the money is Joe Rogan. How important is he to the UFC, to the rise of the UFC, and what in general do you love about Joe?
Dana White
It’s a fact, he doesn’t care about money, and he did the first 13 shows for free for us. You know what I mean? That was at a time when we were hurting and he’s like, “Wait a minute, you want me to do the commentary? You’re saying that I get to sit in the best seat in the house and watch these fights for free? Yeah, I’m in.” And then obviously, when we turned things around, we made it up to Joe. But Joe is one of the things that I loved early on about…
It’s a fact, he doesn’t care about money, and he did the first 13 shows for free for us. You know what I mean? That was at a time when we were hurting and he’s like, “Wait a minute, you want me to do the commentary? You’re saying that I get to sit in the best seat in the house and watch these fights for free? Yeah, I’m in.” And then obviously, when we turned things around, we made it up to Joe. But Joe is one of the things that I loved early on about…
So I’ll tell you the story. So we buy the UFC. They’re based in New York. We’re moving the corporate offices to Vegas. So I have to fly out to New York, go into the offices and start going through everything and figuring out what needs to come back to Vegas and what we can just throw away. So they literally had a VHS machine and a TV, and there were a million tapes in this place, man. So I didn’t know what tapes were these definitely we have to keep, or these we don’t need. So I had to sit there and go through every single tape. And I popped in a tape and there was an interview on the Ivory Keenen Wayans show, the oldest Wayans brother, and he had a talk show at the time, and he had Joe Rogan, the guy from Fear Factor on the show, and he was promoting Fear Factor, but all he would talk about was UFC.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, that’s Joe.
Yeah, that’s Joe.
Dana White
And he was talking about how people think that these guys in the martial arts movies are tough, and he was talking about what UFC fighters would do to these martial arts guys if they ever got their hands on them. And I was like, this is exactly what I need. A guy who isn’t afraid to speak his mind and knows the sport inside and out, but more importantly, is super passionate about it and loves it.
And he was talking about how people think that these guys in the martial arts movies are tough, and he was talking about what UFC fighters would do to these martial arts guys if they ever got their hands on them. And I was like, this is exactly what I need. A guy who isn’t afraid to speak his mind and knows the sport inside and out, but more importantly, is super passionate about it and loves it.
So when you see Joe Rogan on camera, and I was talking about the paid talking heads that they had in HBO boxing that were terrible, Joe Rogan does not come off as a paid talking head. He comes off as a guy who loves this. And so early on, no media would cover us. So I had to buy my way onto radio. So we’d do these radio tours, and they would drop us in. You’d have to get up at 3:30 in the morning in Vegas, on the west coast, because they’re at 6:30 in the morning in New York and Boston and Florida and all these other places. So they drop you into these markets to do radio, and the fighters were horrible at it. Fighters getting up at 3:30 in the morning, especially leading up to a fight, never good. They sound like they’re tired, they act like they’re tired, and they definitely act like they don’t want to be on there, and it’s bad radio. What you can’t have is bad radio. So the only two people that could pull off these radio tours were me and Joe Rogan. So me and Joe Rogan would alternate doing these radio tours all over the country.
Lex Fridman
Just talking about fighting, talking about-
Just talking about fighting, talking about-
Dana White
Exactly.
Exactly.
Lex Fridman
… what this whole thing is,
… what this whole thing is,
Dana White
A hundred percent.
A hundred percent.
Lex Fridman
… getting people excited.
… getting people excited.
Dana White
Two guys that are really into it and passionate about it and love it. And it’s one of the things about Rogan too, when early on, nobody understood the ground game. Joe Rogan would walk you through what was happening literally before it would happen. He would tell you the setup, what was going to come next and everything. He’d just absolutely articulate it perfectly, brilliantly, and people at home started to understand. And the impact that Joe Rogan has had and continues to have on this sport is immeasurable. He’s the biggest podcaster in the world, and he is on the UFC pay-per-views 14 times a year, and he’s always talking about the sport. It’s immeasurable what this guy has done for this company and the sport.
Two guys that are really into it and passionate about it and love it. And it’s one of the things about Rogan too, when early on, nobody understood the ground game. Joe Rogan would walk you through what was happening literally before it would happen. He would tell you the setup, what was going to come next and everything. He’d just absolutely articulate it perfectly, brilliantly, and people at home started to understand. And the impact that Joe Rogan has had and continues to have on this sport is immeasurable. He’s the biggest podcaster in the world, and he is on the UFC pay-per-views 14 times a year, and he’s always talking about the sport. It’s immeasurable what this guy has done for this company and the sport.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, still to this day, like I’ll have dinner with him offline, he’ll just talk fighting. He just loves it.
Yeah, still to this day, like I’ll have dinner with him offline, he’ll just talk fighting. He just loves it.
Dana White
It’s true.
It’s true.
Lex Fridman
Loves every aspect of it.
Loves every aspect of it.
Dana White
Yep. Joe Rogan is one of those guys. I saw that early on. Why would you go after the Fear Factor guy to be such a key component, to not only the company, but to the sport? I saw it in the fucking interview on Ivory Keenen Wayans.
Yep. Joe Rogan is one of those guys. I saw that early on. Why would you go after the Fear Factor guy to be such a key component, to not only the company, but to the sport? I saw it in the fucking interview on Ivory Keenen Wayans.
Lex Fridman
I value loyalty a lot, and I remember there was a moment not too long ago, maybe a year ago when I was sitting with Joe and he had a phone call with you. Joe was getting canceled for something, and they didn’t want him commentating the fights, and you on the phone offered your resignation over this. I got teary-eyed over that. That’s such a… You’re a good man. You know?
I value loyalty a lot, and I remember there was a moment not too long ago, maybe a year ago when I was sitting with Joe and he had a phone call with you. Joe was getting canceled for something, and they didn’t want him commentating the fights, and you on the phone offered your resignation over this. I got teary-eyed over that. That’s such a… You’re a good man. You know?
Dana White
Thank you.
Thank you.
Lex Fridman
That was powerful.
That was powerful.
Dana White
Anybody who is with me, has been with me, knows. When you’re with me, you’re with me. It’s a two-way street. It’s not a one-way street. I’m not one of these guys that is going to roll over and… It’s like going through COVID. I wasn’t laying any of these people. Some of these people have been with me for 20 years. We’re going to lay them off. This will motherfucker will burn, burn, before I would do that to my people. None of that type of stuff is ever going to happen while I’m here. I can’t say what’s going to happen when I leave, but when I’m here, the people who are with me and have been with me, they know exactly what’s up, and Joe knows what’s up. And again, it’s a two-way street. Joe Rogan has been very loyal to me, and I’m very loyal to Joe Rogan.
Anybody who is with me, has been with me, knows. When you’re with me, you’re with me. It’s a two-way street. It’s not a one-way street. I’m not one of these guys that is going to roll over and… It’s like going through COVID. I wasn’t laying any of these people. Some of these people have been with me for 20 years. We’re going to lay them off. This will motherfucker will burn, burn, before I would do that to my people. None of that type of stuff is ever going to happen while I’m here. I can’t say what’s going to happen when I leave, but when I’m here, the people who are with me and have been with me, they know exactly what’s up, and Joe knows what’s up. And again, it’s a two-way street. Joe Rogan has been very loyal to me, and I’m very loyal to Joe Rogan.
Lorenzo Fertitta
Lex Fridman
Lorenzo, another guy you have close friendship with, you seem to have been extremely effective together as business partners. What’s the magic behind that? How can you explain that?
Lorenzo, another guy you have close friendship with, you seem to have been extremely effective together as business partners. What’s the magic behind that? How can you explain that?
Dana White
I love him. Lorenzo and I work really well together because we have two different personalities. I’m the guy that always… I’m going here. Lorenzo was always here. You could walk in a room and say, “Lorenzo, you just lost $10 million. Lorenzo, you just won $10 million.” It never changes. And I’m a guy that goes like this, right? So we almost balance each other out. There’s a lot of things that he’s really fucking good at, and there’s a lot of things that I’m really good at, and they’re both on the opposite sides of the spectrum.
I love him. Lorenzo and I work really well together because we have two different personalities. I’m the guy that always… I’m going here. Lorenzo was always here. You could walk in a room and say, “Lorenzo, you just lost $10 million. Lorenzo, you just won $10 million.” It never changes. And I’m a guy that goes like this, right? So we almost balance each other out. There’s a lot of things that he’s really fucking good at, and there’s a lot of things that I’m really good at, and they’re both on the opposite sides of the spectrum.
Lex Fridman
So that level headed thing was useful when the UFC was losing money and it was unknown whether it’s going to survive those low points?
So that level headed thing was useful when the UFC was losing money and it was unknown whether it’s going to survive those low points?
Dana White
Yeah. A hundred percent. What’s incredible when you think of the story of the UFC, at the time the casino business was cranking, and station casinos was killing it. And stations, their money from stations is what was funding the UFC. Then in the ’08, ‘9 crash, the UFC was killing it in ’08 and ’09, and the casino businesses were hurting. So timing on everything, the way that it all worked out couldn’t have worked out better for them, and obviously for all of us. When you think about the UFC and how big it is and how far it reaches and how many people it touches, the Fertittas Brothers made a $2 million investment, then put in another 44 million, and look at how many lives that investment has changed over the last 25 years. It’s fascinating.
Yeah. A hundred percent. What’s incredible when you think of the story of the UFC, at the time the casino business was cranking, and station casinos was killing it. And stations, their money from stations is what was funding the UFC. Then in the ’08, ‘9 crash, the UFC was killing it in ’08 and ’09, and the casino businesses were hurting. So timing on everything, the way that it all worked out couldn’t have worked out better for them, and obviously for all of us. When you think about the UFC and how big it is and how far it reaches and how many people it touches, the Fertittas Brothers made a $2 million investment, then put in another 44 million, and look at how many lives that investment has changed over the last 25 years. It’s fascinating.
Lex Fridman
And it’s also crazy. Just forget the business of it. Just the effect it has on the history of humanity in terms of this is what we do, we’re descendants of apes that fight. And this is like the organizations that catalyze the innovation in how we fight. It’s crazy.
And it’s also crazy. Just forget the business of it. Just the effect it has on the history of humanity in terms of this is what we do, we’re descendants of apes that fight. And this is like the organizations that catalyze the innovation in how we fight. It’s crazy.
Dana White
[inaudible 00:40:13].
[inaudible 00:40:13].
Lex Fridman
You created a whole new sport.
You created a whole new sport.
Dana White
That people all over the world participate in now. Literally, there isn’t a place on earth that we can’t get a fighter from now.
That people all over the world participate in now. Literally, there isn’t a place on earth that we can’t get a fighter from now.
Great fighters
Lex Fridman
You said in the UFC 299 post-fight press conference that sometimes fighters might complain that they get matched up, uneven odds, but that’s actually when legends are made. I think you gave Dustin Poirier as an example. Can you elaborate on that a little bit? What makes a legend, what makes greatness in a fight?
You said in the UFC 299 post-fight press conference that sometimes fighters might complain that they get matched up, uneven odds, but that’s actually when legends are made. I think you gave Dustin Poirier as an example. Can you elaborate on that a little bit? What makes a legend, what makes greatness in a fight?
Dana White
So behind the scenes, fighters are a very paranoid bunch of people. They’re very paranoid, and there’s been this theme with fighters where they’re trying to get me beat, right? We don’t determine who wins and loses. If we did, we’d be the WWE, okay? You do. I’m the bells and whistles guy. I make sure that as many people that we can possibly let know that you’re fighting on Saturday know that you’re fighting on Saturday. Who you are, who you’re going against, and why people should give a shit. That’s what I do.
So behind the scenes, fighters are a very paranoid bunch of people. They’re very paranoid, and there’s been this theme with fighters where they’re trying to get me beat, right? We don’t determine who wins and loses. If we did, we’d be the WWE, okay? You do. I’m the bells and whistles guy. I make sure that as many people that we can possibly let know that you’re fighting on Saturday know that you’re fighting on Saturday. Who you are, who you’re going against, and why people should give a shit. That’s what I do.
Then the night you show up, I put on the best live event that I possibly can, and I put on the best television show that I possibly can. Once that door shuts, it’s all up to you. You determine whether you lose or not. And if you get into a position where you become so paranoid that you think that the powers that be here are against you, and you try to steer yourself away from certain fights… That’s one of the big things that happens in these other organizations. In these other organizations, the inmates run the asylum. So if they don’t want to fight bad enough, these other companies don’t push and they don’t do this and they don’t… We put on the best possible matchups that we can make.
And in this business, you might be an older fighter, but if you’re still ranked in the top 10, there’s young guys coming for you. Killers. Young killers are coming out and they want your position. So you being the veteran that you are have to prepare yourself to go in. And everybody was saying, when we made that fight with Saint-Denis that Poirier was in big trouble, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah. That’s awesome. That helps build the entire thing that Poirier, and then Poirier goes out and does what he did that night. That’s what makes fucking legends.
Lex Fridman
It’s interesting because sometimes being the underdog is a really good thing for the long-term story of who you are as a fighter.
It’s interesting because sometimes being the underdog is a really good thing for the long-term story of who you are as a fighter.
Dana White
Especially when you’re a big name and a name that people recognize and a name that people know. And they’re like, “Oh man.” I remember Israel Adesanya and Sean Strickland. A hundred out of a hundred people knew for a fact that Israel was going to win that fight, and here comes Strickland. And we could go on for days with this. You know what I mean? That is what creates legendary moments, legendary fights, and it’s what builds stars and legends.
Especially when you’re a big name and a name that people recognize and a name that people know. And they’re like, “Oh man.” I remember Israel Adesanya and Sean Strickland. A hundred out of a hundred people knew for a fact that Israel was going to win that fight, and here comes Strickland. And we could go on for days with this. You know what I mean? That is what creates legendary moments, legendary fights, and it’s what builds stars and legends.
Lex Fridman
Arguably, Conor McGregor with Jose Aldo.
Arguably, Conor McGregor with Jose Aldo.
Dana White
Yep. Conor McGregor with a bunch of people in the beginning. People said he couldn’t wrestle, people said he wouldn’t be able to defend a take down, blah, blah, blah, blah. Nate Diaz against Conor McGregor, you know what I mean?
Yep. Conor McGregor with a bunch of people in the beginning. People said he couldn’t wrestle, people said he wouldn’t be able to defend a take down, blah, blah, blah, blah. Nate Diaz against Conor McGregor, you know what I mean?
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm. And Conor McGregor against Khabib, underdog, probably. But if he won, there’s an opportunity to win. If he won, that’s the legend forming. He’s now in the conversation for the greatest of all time without argument.
Mm-hmm. And Conor McGregor against Khabib, underdog, probably. But if he won, there’s an opportunity to win. If he won, that’s the legend forming. He’s now in the conversation for the greatest of all time without argument.
Dana White
And if you look at the way that Khabib ran through so many people, Conor hung in there-
And if you look at the way that Khabib ran through so many people, Conor hung in there-
Lex Fridman
Yeah. It could have been.
Yeah. It could have been.
Dana White
… and made a fight of it.
… and made a fight of it.
Khabib vs Conor
Lex Fridman
It could have been. What do you think about that matchup? It’s one of the greats, one of the great matchups that you’ve made, Conor McGregor versus Khabib.
It could have been. What do you think about that matchup? It’s one of the greats, one of the great matchups that you’ve made, Conor McGregor versus Khabib.
Dana White
Yeah. At the time, I was incredibly criticized for putting together the spot that had the scene with the bus in it. The fucking medias, but they were saying that I was pandering to the violence that happened and trying to… I’m telling you a story, telling you a story of how we got here and how big this fight is, and how bad the blood is between these guys. And I mean, I think that’s what we do the best job at, is telling the fucking stories of why.
Yeah. At the time, I was incredibly criticized for putting together the spot that had the scene with the bus in it. The fucking medias, but they were saying that I was pandering to the violence that happened and trying to… I’m telling you a story, telling you a story of how we got here and how big this fight is, and how bad the blood is between these guys. And I mean, I think that’s what we do the best job at, is telling the fucking stories of why.
We go into Monday. It’s fight week. We got a whole list of things that we do fight week. And then you get right down to the press conference on Thursday, the weigh-ins on Friday, and then the fights on Saturday. Now my people fly back home, they go to bed on Sunday night, and it’s Groundhog Day. We wake up again on Monday and it starts all over again. Every weekend, every Saturday, for a year. So there’s lots of stories that need to be told, there’s lots of… When you think about what I compete with, whatever takes your attention on a Saturday night is my competitor.
Lex Fridman
So you’re always trying to build a foundation for great stories, and if the fighters step up, they step up and they can together create greatness.
So you’re always trying to build a foundation for great stories, and if the fighters step up, they step up and they can together create greatness.
Dana White
That’s it. That’s exactly right. So when we are aligned, like when you get to the UFC, I mean, you just saw it with MVP, you’re going to see it with Kayla Harrison.
That’s it. That’s exactly right. So when we are aligned, like when you get to the UFC, I mean, you just saw it with MVP, you’re going to see it with Kayla Harrison.
Dana White
You just saw it with MVP, you’re going to see it with Kayla Harrison and so many others that have come from other organizations, and they get here. They notice immediately the difference between fighting here and fighting wherever they were before. It’s not even comparable to the impact it has on you when you leave whatever organization you’re with and you come to the UFC. And I think that it gives them a sense of, holy shit. MVP when he came, I mean there were probably more people at the press conference than any fight he’d ever fought in, in Bellator. You know what I mean? And you feel that energy and you feel the difference of the impact of being here, and I think it takes a lot of these guys to another level.
You just saw it with MVP, you’re going to see it with Kayla Harrison and so many others that have come from other organizations, and they get here. They notice immediately the difference between fighting here and fighting wherever they were before. It’s not even comparable to the impact it has on you when you leave whatever organization you’re with and you come to the UFC. And I think that it gives them a sense of, holy shit. MVP when he came, I mean there were probably more people at the press conference than any fight he’d ever fought in, in Bellator. You know what I mean? And you feel that energy and you feel the difference of the impact of being here, and I think it takes a lot of these guys to another level.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Just the aura of it.
Yeah. Just the aura of it.
Dana White
100%.
100%.
Lex Fridman
This is where you’re supposed to step up. Yeah, it’s the way people feel about Ted Talks, giving lectures.
This is where you’re supposed to step up. Yeah, it’s the way people feel about Ted Talks, giving lectures.
Dana White
Right.
Right.
Lex Fridman
This is your moment. You get 15 minutes and you better say some interesting shit. And Kayla Harrison, by the way, is a badass. I can’t wait to see what happens there.
This is your moment. You get 15 minutes and you better say some interesting shit. And Kayla Harrison, by the way, is a badass. I can’t wait to see what happens there.
Dana White
She was walking around with this sleeveless shirt the night of the fights and holy shit, she’s jacked, man. It’s crazy.
She was walking around with this sleeveless shirt the night of the fights and holy shit, she’s jacked, man. It’s crazy.
Lex Fridman
Two time Olympic gold medalist.
Two time Olympic gold medalist.
Dana White
Right.
Right.
Lex Fridman
You don’t fuck with those people. You win a medal, you’re made of something special.
You don’t fuck with those people. You win a medal, you’re made of something special.
Dana White
So true. Especially in judo.
So true. Especially in judo.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, especially in American judo where you don’t have many training partners that are great.
Yeah, especially in American judo where you don’t have many training partners that are great.
Dana White
That’s what I’m saying.
That’s what I’m saying.
Jon Jones
Lex Fridman
So you better fucking work for it. Ridiculous question, but who’s in the conversation for the greatest of all time?
So you better fucking work for it. Ridiculous question, but who’s in the conversation for the greatest of all time?
Dana White
Jon Jones.
Jon Jones.
Lex Fridman
You’ve talked about Jon Jones, but what are the metrics involved here?
You’ve talked about Jon Jones, but what are the metrics involved here?
Dana White
He’s never been beat. He destroyed everybody at light heavyweight, which at the time was the toughest weight class in the company, in the sport. And then he moved up to heavyweight, won easily at heavyweight. When you look at a guy and you look at what he was doing outside the octagon at the same time, which shouldn’t be part of it, shouldn’t be part of the equation, but when you do, wow, there’s no debate. Nobody can debate who’s the greatest of all time. It’s absolutely positively Jon Jones. He’s never lost. He’s never been beat in the octagon ever.
He’s never been beat. He destroyed everybody at light heavyweight, which at the time was the toughest weight class in the company, in the sport. And then he moved up to heavyweight, won easily at heavyweight. When you look at a guy and you look at what he was doing outside the octagon at the same time, which shouldn’t be part of it, shouldn’t be part of the equation, but when you do, wow, there’s no debate. Nobody can debate who’s the greatest of all time. It’s absolutely positively Jon Jones. He’s never lost. He’s never been beat in the octagon ever.
Lex Fridman
So that’s one of the metrics, pure sheer dominance. But there’s others. Losing sometimes is a catalyst for greatness.
So that’s one of the metrics, pure sheer dominance. But there’s others. Losing sometimes is a catalyst for greatness.
Dana White
I don’t disagree. But when you’ve never lost, you’ve never lost. We’ve never found somebody. And the other thing that you have to factor in too is longevity. Because sometimes with a lot of these guys, the sport passes them by. You get younger guys that are faster, this, that, and the sport evolves. Nobody’s been able to beat Jon Jones. Oh, and the other thing that you measure is, when you said dominance, it’s true, if you’re this guy that has unbelievable power and you’re just going in and you’re just fucking knocking everybody out and nobody’s ever pulled you into the deep water before, that was when my opinion of Jon Jones started to change.
I don’t disagree. But when you’ve never lost, you’ve never lost. We’ve never found somebody. And the other thing that you have to factor in too is longevity. Because sometimes with a lot of these guys, the sport passes them by. You get younger guys that are faster, this, that, and the sport evolves. Nobody’s been able to beat Jon Jones. Oh, and the other thing that you measure is, when you said dominance, it’s true, if you’re this guy that has unbelievable power and you’re just going in and you’re just fucking knocking everybody out and nobody’s ever pulled you into the deep water before, that was when my opinion of Jon Jones started to change.
Gustafsson took him into the deep water. Gustafsson hit him with some shit he’d never been hit with. Gustafsson tested him and put Jon Jones in a place where, I bet if you sat down and interviewed John Jones, going into the deep rounds of that, Jon Jones thought he was going to die. You know what I’m saying?
Lex Fridman
And he’s willing to go there.
And he’s willing to go there.
Dana White
And he kept going. He was willing, willing to do whatever it took to win that fight.
And he kept going. He was willing, willing to do whatever it took to win that fight.
Lex Fridman
And it breaks my heart because he beat DC, and DC is one of the greatest of all time.
And it breaks my heart because he beat DC, and DC is one of the greatest of all time.
Dana White
That’s the thing too. And I believe that DC doesn’t get the credit he deserves because of the Jon Jones thing. When you look at DC and what he’s accomplished, and Jon Jones beat him twice.
That’s the thing too. And I believe that DC doesn’t get the credit he deserves because of the Jon Jones thing. When you look at DC and what he’s accomplished, and Jon Jones beat him twice.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Dana White
It’s undeniable. You can hate all you want. Jon Jones is the greatest of all time.
It’s undeniable. You can hate all you want. Jon Jones is the greatest of all time.
Lex Fridman
Do you think Habib was tested enough?
Do you think Habib was tested enough?
Dana White
I think that Habib had the potential to be in the running for that. He just didn’t stick around. First of all, he had injuries that he should have been where he got a lot sooner had he not had the injuries that he had and the setbacks in his career. But there’s no doubt, Habib is one of the all-time greats.
I think that Habib had the potential to be in the running for that. He just didn’t stick around. First of all, he had injuries that he should have been where he got a lot sooner had he not had the injuries that he had and the setbacks in his career. But there’s no doubt, Habib is one of the all-time greats.
Conor McGregor
Lex Fridman
What’s the good, the bad, and the ugly of your relationship with Conor?
What’s the good, the bad, and the ugly of your relationship with Conor?
Dana White
There’s literally no ugly. Conor McGregor has been an incredible partner to work with. If Conor showed up to things on time, there wouldn’t be one fucking bad thing I could say about Conor. You know what I mean?
There’s literally no ugly. Conor McGregor has been an incredible partner to work with. If Conor showed up to things on time, there wouldn’t be one fucking bad thing I could say about Conor. You know what I mean?
Lex Fridman
It’s only being late to shit?
It’s only being late to shit?
Dana White
If you put a fucking gun to my head and said, “Don’t lie, mother-fucker. Tell me all the bad things about Conor McGregor.” I’d say the guy doesn’t show up on time. That’s it.
If you put a fucking gun to my head and said, “Don’t lie, mother-fucker. Tell me all the bad things about Conor McGregor.” I’d say the guy doesn’t show up on time. That’s it.
Lex Fridman
That’s it.
That’s it.
Dana White
If Conor McGregor showed up to shit on time, and sometimes he does. Sometimes he does. He’s been a great partner. If you look at what a huge superstar he became, the fights that he was involved in, let me tell you what Conor McGregor never did. We never walked in a room and said, “Conor, this guy just fell out. We want you to fight this guy.” And he was like, “No way. I’m not taking this fucking risk. I’m at this point in my career where my money, my this, my that,” he was like, “Fuck it, let’s do it.” He’d always say, “Let’s do it.”
If Conor McGregor showed up to shit on time, and sometimes he does. Sometimes he does. He’s been a great partner. If you look at what a huge superstar he became, the fights that he was involved in, let me tell you what Conor McGregor never did. We never walked in a room and said, “Conor, this guy just fell out. We want you to fight this guy.” And he was like, “No way. I’m not taking this fucking risk. I’m at this point in my career where my money, my this, my that,” he was like, “Fuck it, let’s do it.” He’d always say, “Let’s do it.”
The other thing that Conor McGregor never did, no matter how big he was or whatever it was, and we were heading into a fight, “Oh, Conor, this guy just fell out. Aldo fell out. We’re looking for another,” “Yeah, I’ll do it, but I’m going to need another 200,000. I’m going to need another $1 million.” Conor McGregor never did that chicken shit, bullshit kind of stuff. He never did any of that. Conor was as solid a guy as you could possibly work with.
Lex Fridman
Just fuck it, I’ll do it.
Just fuck it, I’ll do it.
Dana White
I’ll do it. There’s actually a scene, because we were filming something, I don’t know if it was embedded or what we were filming at the time. Me and Lorenzo walk into his house that he rented here in Vegas, and I’m pretty sure it was when Aldo fell out, and we’re telling him this, that, and we’re looking at some options. He says, “I’m going to the gym. When I’m done working out, let me know.” He just woke up out of bed, he is in his fucking underwear, and he gets hit with this and he is like, “All right, I’m going to the gym. Let me know when I get out who I’m fighting.” Doesn’t care. Doesn’t want to know. Doesn’t want any more money. Nothing. Fucking shows up and he delivers. Conor has been incredibly successful, he’s made a lot of money, and he’s had his ups and downs outside and inside the octagon. But as for a guy who was on the dole and was a plumber, he’s actually a really smart businessman and he has been one of the best partners that I’ve ever had in the history of the sport.
I’ll do it. There’s actually a scene, because we were filming something, I don’t know if it was embedded or what we were filming at the time. Me and Lorenzo walk into his house that he rented here in Vegas, and I’m pretty sure it was when Aldo fell out, and we’re telling him this, that, and we’re looking at some options. He says, “I’m going to the gym. When I’m done working out, let me know.” He just woke up out of bed, he is in his fucking underwear, and he gets hit with this and he is like, “All right, I’m going to the gym. Let me know when I get out who I’m fighting.” Doesn’t care. Doesn’t want to know. Doesn’t want any more money. Nothing. Fucking shows up and he delivers. Conor has been incredibly successful, he’s made a lot of money, and he’s had his ups and downs outside and inside the octagon. But as for a guy who was on the dole and was a plumber, he’s actually a really smart businessman and he has been one of the best partners that I’ve ever had in the history of the sport.
Lex Fridman
And an important part of the history of the UFC.
And an important part of the history of the UFC.
Dana White
Big.
Big.
Lex Fridman
He opened it up to all kinds of new eyes.
He opened it up to all kinds of new eyes.
Dana White
Yep. He literally set Europe, Australia, Canada, and many other parts of the world on fire, man. He was our first legit megastar.
Yep. He literally set Europe, Australia, Canada, and many other parts of the world on fire, man. He was our first legit megastar.
Lex Fridman
And I personally think he doesn’t get enough credit for just how good he was as a fighter. People love to talk shit about Conor.
And I personally think he doesn’t get enough credit for just how good he was as a fighter. People love to talk shit about Conor.
Dana White
So true.
So true.
Lex Fridman
I suppose that’s part of his magic.
I suppose that’s part of his magic.
Dana White
But it comes with success. When you’re successful, there’s always people out there that are going to talk shit. You always have a bunch of know nothing, do nothing fucking losers that love to talk shit.
But it comes with success. When you’re successful, there’s always people out there that are going to talk shit. You always have a bunch of know nothing, do nothing fucking losers that love to talk shit.
Lex Fridman
You think if you were to do it all over again, Habib is the right matchup?
You think if you were to do it all over again, Habib is the right matchup?
Dana White
Yeah. Listen, the thing that you can’t do is avoid match-ups. You know what I mean? This is what we’re talking about when you talk about being a legend. Conor McGregor needed Habib. Habib needed Conor McGregor. You can hate each other as much as you want, but you have to fight these other legendary bad mother-fuckers to yourself. Become a legend. I mean, it’s like Jon Jones needed Cyril Gun and Cyril Gun needed Jon Jones, because if Cyril could have beat Jon, the first guy, if anybody can ever figure it out and beat Jon Jones, it’s a big deal. And it’s almost like your obligation as a fighter. And when you think about Jon Jones became who he is today, and the reason I’m sitting here telling you how great he is, because all these other guys gave him the opportunity to beat them. Or they beat Jon. It’s all about giving these other guys the opportunity. Saint Denis, Poirier gave him the opportunity to come in and beat him. That’s how this all works.
Yeah. Listen, the thing that you can’t do is avoid match-ups. You know what I mean? This is what we’re talking about when you talk about being a legend. Conor McGregor needed Habib. Habib needed Conor McGregor. You can hate each other as much as you want, but you have to fight these other legendary bad mother-fuckers to yourself. Become a legend. I mean, it’s like Jon Jones needed Cyril Gun and Cyril Gun needed Jon Jones, because if Cyril could have beat Jon, the first guy, if anybody can ever figure it out and beat Jon Jones, it’s a big deal. And it’s almost like your obligation as a fighter. And when you think about Jon Jones became who he is today, and the reason I’m sitting here telling you how great he is, because all these other guys gave him the opportunity to beat them. Or they beat Jon. It’s all about giving these other guys the opportunity. Saint Denis, Poirier gave him the opportunity to come in and beat him. That’s how this all works.
Lex Fridman
It’s the two of them together, the two fighters together.
It’s the two of them together, the two fighters together.
Dana White
You have to have them both. Listen, I could line up a bunch of no-name bums that Jon Jones could run through. That’s what they do in all the other organizations. We would have nothing to fucking talk about right now.
You have to have them both. Listen, I could line up a bunch of no-name bums that Jon Jones could run through. That’s what they do in all the other organizations. We would have nothing to fucking talk about right now.
Lex Fridman
That’s why, luckily, a perfect record in the UFC is not as important as who you fought, how you fought.
That’s why, luckily, a perfect record in the UFC is not as important as who you fought, how you fought.
Dana White
So true. But when you have a perfect record in the UFC, holy shit, right?
So true. But when you have a perfect record in the UFC, holy shit, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Dana White
When you can have a perfect record in the UFC, you are absolutely one of the most special athletes on planet earth.
When you can have a perfect record in the UFC, you are absolutely one of the most special athletes on planet earth.
Trump
Lex Fridman
You and Trump are friends. I just talked to Ivanka last night about her experience in the Miami event. She loves it. She’s training too. You’re talking about getting girls to train. She’s trained.
You and Trump are friends. I just talked to Ivanka last night about her experience in the Miami event. She loves it. She’s training too. You’re talking about getting girls to train. She’s trained.
Dana White
And the kids are training, yeah. Her father’s the biggest fucking fight fan on the planet. Calls me all the time to talk about the fights. And Don Jr. said that I’m the only guy on earth that he bros out with. It’s funny when you talk about how powerful fighting is. This last Miami event, the President of Ecuador and the President of Spain both posted about the fights. Habib beat Conor. Putin was on FaceTime before he even made it to the locker room. Trump, sitting President, ex-President, watching all the fights, calling, wants to talk about the fights. Valentina Shevchenko, every time she goes home, she meets with the President of the country. The list goes on and on and on. Elon Musk, Zuckerberg, the list goes on and on and on, the most powerful people in the world are all obsessed with fighting.
And the kids are training, yeah. Her father’s the biggest fucking fight fan on the planet. Calls me all the time to talk about the fights. And Don Jr. said that I’m the only guy on earth that he bros out with. It’s funny when you talk about how powerful fighting is. This last Miami event, the President of Ecuador and the President of Spain both posted about the fights. Habib beat Conor. Putin was on FaceTime before he even made it to the locker room. Trump, sitting President, ex-President, watching all the fights, calling, wants to talk about the fights. Valentina Shevchenko, every time she goes home, she meets with the President of the country. The list goes on and on and on. Elon Musk, Zuckerberg, the list goes on and on and on, the most powerful people in the world are all obsessed with fighting.
Lex Fridman
When did you first discover that Trump loves fighting?
When did you first discover that Trump loves fighting?
Dana White
I first discovered that Trump was a big fight fan, obviously, you saw him, we were talking about how big boxing fans we were, he was a part of all the big fights back then. But when we first bought the UFC, this thing was so bad venues didn’t even want us. And we ended up doing our first event in Atlantic City at the Trump Taj Mahal. Now, think about this. At that time, Trump brand here, UFC brand, I can’t go low enough. And he had us at his venue two times, back to back, showed up for the first fight of the night, and stayed till the last fight of the night. Then after that, any good thing that would ever happen to me in my career, Trump would reach out. Whether it was, we were on the front page of the New York Times at one time and he said, “Congratulations, Dana. I always knew you guys were going to do it.” Little things like that, but that are big things and mean a lot, especially coming from a guy like him.
I first discovered that Trump was a big fight fan, obviously, you saw him, we were talking about how big boxing fans we were, he was a part of all the big fights back then. But when we first bought the UFC, this thing was so bad venues didn’t even want us. And we ended up doing our first event in Atlantic City at the Trump Taj Mahal. Now, think about this. At that time, Trump brand here, UFC brand, I can’t go low enough. And he had us at his venue two times, back to back, showed up for the first fight of the night, and stayed till the last fight of the night. Then after that, any good thing that would ever happen to me in my career, Trump would reach out. Whether it was, we were on the front page of the New York Times at one time and he said, “Congratulations, Dana. I always knew you guys were going to do it.” Little things like that, but that are big things and mean a lot, especially coming from a guy like him.
Lex Fridman
He saw something in you like, this is going to be…
He saw something in you like, this is going to be…
Dana White
100%. He definitely saw it. And then comes ’15, ’16, whenever it was, I don’t remember, but he called me and he said, “Listen, if you don’t want to do this, I completely understand, but I would be honored if you would speak at the National Republican Convention for me.” And I’m not a very political guy, you know what I mean? And everybody told me not to do it. “Do not do this.” But I was like, why would I not do this? This guy’s been great to me. And I did it. And our relationship is just like, you know what I mean? I consider Donald Trump to be one of my very, very good friends.
100%. He definitely saw it. And then comes ’15, ’16, whenever it was, I don’t remember, but he called me and he said, “Listen, if you don’t want to do this, I completely understand, but I would be honored if you would speak at the National Republican Convention for me.” And I’m not a very political guy, you know what I mean? And everybody told me not to do it. “Do not do this.” But I was like, why would I not do this? This guy’s been great to me. And I did it. And our relationship is just like, you know what I mean? I consider Donald Trump to be one of my very, very good friends.
Lex Fridman
Any favorite stories?
Any favorite stories?
Dana White
There’s so many stories. Once he won the election, I’d be at work and I’d be down the hall in the matchmaking room, whatever, and my secretary would yell, “The President’s on the phone!”, fucking come running down the hallway and grab the phone, and he’d want to talk about the fight that was coming up or the fight that happened. Or I’d be in my car and I’d answer the phone and it’s like, “Hi. This is the White House. We have the President of the United States on the phone.” That’s a trip, when that first starts happening. And then just to sum him up, this is the kind of guy that you want to talk about a fighter, this is the most resilient human being I’ve ever met. If you see the shit that this guy’s going through publicly every day.
There’s so many stories. Once he won the election, I’d be at work and I’d be down the hall in the matchmaking room, whatever, and my secretary would yell, “The President’s on the phone!”, fucking come running down the hallway and grab the phone, and he’d want to talk about the fight that was coming up or the fight that happened. Or I’d be in my car and I’d answer the phone and it’s like, “Hi. This is the White House. We have the President of the United States on the phone.” That’s a trip, when that first starts happening. And then just to sum him up, this is the kind of guy that you want to talk about a fighter, this is the most resilient human being I’ve ever met. If you see the shit that this guy’s going through publicly every day.
And I’ll call him on the phone as a friend and be like, “Hey, you good? How you doing?” Unfazed, unfazed like nothing’s going on. And then he’ll start talking to me about this and that and all this other. One time, there’s only been one time, I’ve never talked about this publicly, but one time I called him and he was not good. He was a mess. I’ve never heard him like that and I’ve never seen him like that. When Ivana died, the only time I’ve ever seen him fucked up. Obviously, as soon as I heard it, I reached out. And I have never, look at all the stuff that’s gone on with Trump, all the bad stuff that they say, they’re trying to attack him, they’re trying to ruin him, unfazed. I called him that day and it’s the first time I’ve ever seen that guy busted up and not good.
Lex Fridman
But that says something that that’s the only time.
But that says something that that’s the only time.
Dana White
100%.
100%.
Lex Fridman
Because that that guy is, I mean, walking through fire.
Because that that guy is, I mean, walking through fire.
Dana White
He does not get rattled. He will walk through fire. He’s an absolute savage.
He does not get rattled. He will walk through fire. He’s an absolute savage.
Lex Fridman
You think he wins the Presidential election?
You think he wins the Presidential election?
Dana White
I don’t know, man. It’s going to depend on how this whole… Politics is the most dirtiest, scummiest thing on planet earth, man, and who knows how this is all going to play out. It’s all dirty. It’s all ugly. And obviously I’m rooting for him and I’m behind him and I hope he does. But we’ll see.
I don’t know, man. It’s going to depend on how this whole… Politics is the most dirtiest, scummiest thing on planet earth, man, and who knows how this is all going to play out. It’s all dirty. It’s all ugly. And obviously I’m rooting for him and I’m behind him and I hope he does. But we’ll see.
Lex Fridman
What’s dirtier, the fighting game in the early days or politics?
What’s dirtier, the fighting game in the early days or politics?
Dana White
There’s nothing dirtier than politics, nothing. There’s literally nothing dirtier.
There’s nothing dirtier than politics, nothing. There’s literally nothing dirtier.
Lex Fridman
All right.
All right.
Dana White
It is the dirtiest thing on planet Earth.
It is the dirtiest thing on planet Earth.
Elon vs Zuck
Lex Fridman
I just wanted to get that on record. Another guy who doesn’t seem to be phased by the fire, I’ve gotten to know him, is Elon. I have to ask you, it’s a bit of fun. You were a part of thinking about putting together Zuck versus Elon. I trained with both. I did a phone call with Elon and you when we were training on the mat.
I just wanted to get that on record. Another guy who doesn’t seem to be phased by the fire, I’ve gotten to know him, is Elon. I have to ask you, it’s a bit of fun. You were a part of thinking about putting together Zuck versus Elon. I trained with both. I did a phone call with Elon and you when we were training on the mat.
Dana White
I remember, yeah.
I remember, yeah.
Lex Fridman
You really think that could have been a good fight?
You really think that could have been a good fight?
Dana White
It would’ve been the biggest fight ever done.
It would’ve been the biggest fight ever done.
Lex Fridman
The spectacle of it.
The spectacle of it.
Dana White
Two of the most powerful, wealthiest men in the world. Lots of guys talk hit and go back and forth and sue each other and do all this stuff. These two guys were literally talking about facing each other in the octagon and fighting. And they’re in a business that’s looked at as geeky. You know what I mean? They’re tech nerds. They’re this, they’re that. These are two dudes that were willing to throw down and fight. And you know as well as I do, there’s a lot of public speculation about this. I was taking serious real time and working on this thing. I had projections, I had numbers. I was looking at venues. I was on the phone with the fucking coliseum in Italy. You name it, I was in it. These guys were serious. And this was something that was really going to happen. And I’ll tell you right now, in the short amount of time that it was going down, it was fun. I was having a blast with it.
Two of the most powerful, wealthiest men in the world. Lots of guys talk hit and go back and forth and sue each other and do all this stuff. These two guys were literally talking about facing each other in the octagon and fighting. And they’re in a business that’s looked at as geeky. You know what I mean? They’re tech nerds. They’re this, they’re that. These are two dudes that were willing to throw down and fight. And you know as well as I do, there’s a lot of public speculation about this. I was taking serious real time and working on this thing. I had projections, I had numbers. I was looking at venues. I was on the phone with the fucking coliseum in Italy. You name it, I was in it. These guys were serious. And this was something that was really going to happen. And I’ll tell you right now, in the short amount of time that it was going down, it was fun. I was having a blast with it.
Mike Tyson vs Jake Paul
Lex Fridman
What do you think about Tyson, Tyson fighting Jake Paul?
What do you think about Tyson, Tyson fighting Jake Paul?
Dana White
I love Mike Tyson, and I’m not a fan of anybody fighting at our age. But he’s a grown man, obviously, and he’s going to do what he’s going to do. But at least I know, I talked to his wife a couple of days ago, and he’s taken this serious and he’s training for it. So we’ll see how it plays out.
I love Mike Tyson, and I’m not a fan of anybody fighting at our age. But he’s a grown man, obviously, and he’s going to do what he’s going to do. But at least I know, I talked to his wife a couple of days ago, and he’s taken this serious and he’s training for it. So we’ll see how it plays out.
Lex Fridman
Why do you think he fights though? What is that about? Is there a broader lesson there about fighters, about great fighters?
Why do you think he fights though? What is that about? Is there a broader lesson there about fighters, about great fighters?
Dana White
I think that Mike Tyson is actually one of those unique guys who has crossed over. Any of these other boxers from his era, they have no way of making money other than fighting. Mike Tyson has made a lot of money outside of fighting. Tyson still has that aura. You could be at a restaurant and he walks in and you’re like, “Holy fuck. Mike Tyson’s here.” He still has that type of aura and energy in a room, and he makes lots of money outside of the ring. I think that he ends up getting these offers that he can’t refuse.
I think that Mike Tyson is actually one of those unique guys who has crossed over. Any of these other boxers from his era, they have no way of making money other than fighting. Mike Tyson has made a lot of money outside of fighting. Tyson still has that aura. You could be at a restaurant and he walks in and you’re like, “Holy fuck. Mike Tyson’s here.” He still has that type of aura and energy in a room, and he makes lots of money outside of the ring. I think that he ends up getting these offers that he can’t refuse.
Lex Fridman
Oh, you think it’s financial? I mean, that’s a good question to ask. You work with a lot of fighters. For how many of them is it about money and for how many is it about the fact of the pure love of fighting?
Oh, you think it’s financial? I mean, that’s a good question to ask. You work with a lot of fighters. For how many of them is it about money and for how many is it about the fact of the pure love of fighting?
Dana White
Well, the guys that get into it for the right reason are the guys who get into it for greatness. Because you want to be the fucking best. And when you’re in it for that reason, you love it and you want to be looked at as the best ever, and you have the talent, the money happens. Then you have other guys who get in, believe me, I’ve dealt with fighters who just wanted to be famous and just wanted to make money. You know what I mean? And listen, it is what it is. It’s your life and you live it the way that you want and do your thing. But the ones that are beloved are the guys who really want to be fucking great and they’re the ones that are remembered. When you look at Tyson in his early years, when he came up under Cus D’Amato, he was a student of the game.
Well, the guys that get into it for the right reason are the guys who get into it for greatness. Because you want to be the fucking best. And when you’re in it for that reason, you love it and you want to be looked at as the best ever, and you have the talent, the money happens. Then you have other guys who get in, believe me, I’ve dealt with fighters who just wanted to be famous and just wanted to make money. You know what I mean? And listen, it is what it is. It’s your life and you live it the way that you want and do your thing. But the ones that are beloved are the guys who really want to be fucking great and they’re the ones that are remembered. When you look at Tyson in his early years, when he came up under Cus D’Amato, he was a student of the game.
He loved everything. He became completely infatuated with the fight game. Then he became such a massive superstar, it’s almost like the whole thing starts to turn on you. All the things that come at you at a young age and that kind of money, it’s tough. It’s tough to navigate and get through. You say something like that and people are like, “Oh, poor him. He had fucking $100 million and couldn’t…” At that age and with all the shit that people talk and all the things that you got to put up with and the fame, a lot of people deal with fame, some people handle it really well and some people don’t. And the perfect example of that was Forrest Griffin and Stephan Bonner. They fought that unbelievable fight on the Ultimate Fighter. Everything blew up after that. Forrest dealt with fame really well and Stephan did not.
Forrest Griffin vs Stephan Bonnar
Lex Fridman
That was a special fight.
That was a special fight.
Dana White
It really was.
It really was.
Lex Fridman
What do you think attracted people to that fight? That was a big leap for the UFC.
What do you think attracted people to that fight? That was a big leap for the UFC.
Dana White
It was everything.
It was everything.
Lex Fridman
It was everything.
It was everything.
Dana White
It was everything.
It was everything.
Lex Fridman
Why do you think people loved that fight? What attracted people to that fight? Why did it change everything?
Why do you think people loved that fight? What attracted people to that fight? Why did it change everything?
Dana White
Well, what happened that night is that the rest of the show was a disaster. We had the co-main event and the main event. Diego Sanchez ran through Kenny Florian in seconds. Oh my God, that was terrible. And the fights that led up to that weren’t anything to talk about either. Then Stephan and Forrest got in there and just went toe-to-toe in this unbelievable slug fest live on free television when cable still mattered. And what I heard was at the time, you had people picking up the phone going, “Are you watching this show?” The numbers just started climbing. Then you got a razor-thin decision. Who’s going to win? You got the crowd stomping their feet. It sounded like a train was going through the place and everybody’s chanting, “One more round!” Me and the Fertitta brothers get together and we talk. We’re going to give them both contracts.
Well, what happened that night is that the rest of the show was a disaster. We had the co-main event and the main event. Diego Sanchez ran through Kenny Florian in seconds. Oh my God, that was terrible. And the fights that led up to that weren’t anything to talk about either. Then Stephan and Forrest got in there and just went toe-to-toe in this unbelievable slug fest live on free television when cable still mattered. And what I heard was at the time, you had people picking up the phone going, “Are you watching this show?” The numbers just started climbing. Then you got a razor-thin decision. Who’s going to win? You got the crowd stomping their feet. It sounded like a train was going through the place and everybody’s chanting, “One more round!” Me and the Fertitta brothers get together and we talk. We’re going to give them both contracts.
So we give them both contracts and the place erupts. It couldn’t have been a more perfect fight at the most perfect time. It all came together. It’s almost like this was meant to be. You know what I mean? Yeah. So we had so many problems with Spike TV at the time, because halfway through the season, the president of the company got fired. All the things that we thought we were going to get that year, we had this runaway hit show. And normally at that time when you would see runaway hit shows, there’d be commercials. It’d be on billboards. It’d be on the side of buses in L.A. and New York. We got none of that. We didn’t even know if we were going to get a second season coming out of that. And when that fight was over, I swear to God, I was like, “I don’t even give a fuck. We’re going to end up somewhere now after this fight.” And we didn’t even make it out of the building that night. The Spike guys did the contract with us in the alley on a fucking napkin after the fight.
Lex Fridman
So you already saw the magic of the fight itself. It captured something.
So you already saw the magic of the fight itself. It captured something.
Dana White
Once that happened and all the shit, and at that time, I didn’t know the ratings, it’s not like we were streaming and we could see, we had no idea, but I knew.
Once that happened and all the shit, and at that time, I didn’t know the ratings, it’s not like we were streaming and we could see, we had no idea, but I knew.
Lex Fridman
You just knew this was [inaudible 01:08:13].
You just knew this was [inaudible 01:08:13].
Dana White
I knew .
I knew .
Lex Fridman
What is that? It’s just two people being willing to stand toe to toe and just go to war.
What is that? It’s just two people being willing to stand toe to toe and just go to war.
Dana White
And when you think about what was at stake. There was a car. Remember the Kia? The winner got a Kia.
And when you think about what was at stake. There was a car. Remember the Kia? The winner got a Kia.
Lex Fridman
I don’t even remember that.
I don’t even remember that.
Dana White
That’s what was the fucking. And Stefan and Forrest, the will to win, they both wanted to win that fight so bad.
That’s what was the fucking. And Stefan and Forrest, the will to win, they both wanted to win that fight so bad.
Lex Fridman
It was bigger than the Kia probably.
It was bigger than the Kia probably.
Dana White
Forrest drove that Kia to 200,000 miles. The biggest mistake Kia ever made was not doing a fucking commercial with Forrest Griffin about that car. Forrest Griffin loved that car so much, he drove it. I think he still has it. It’s got 200,000 miles on it, that car. You couldn’t have a better fucking commercial than that. And we reached out to them too. I said, “Kia should know about this.” They fucking…
Forrest drove that Kia to 200,000 miles. The biggest mistake Kia ever made was not doing a fucking commercial with Forrest Griffin about that car. Forrest Griffin loved that car so much, he drove it. I think he still has it. It’s got 200,000 miles on it, that car. You couldn’t have a better fucking commercial than that. And we reached out to them too. I said, “Kia should know about this.” They fucking…
Dana White
… and we reached out to them too. I said, “Kia should know about this.” They fucking blew it. You got a bunch of… You know how those guys are in the business world. They don’t fucking get anything.
… and we reached out to them too. I said, “Kia should know about this.” They fucking blew it. You got a bunch of… You know how those guys are in the business world. They don’t fucking get anything.
Lex Fridman
Maybe it was about the Kia then.
Maybe it was about the Kia then.
Dana White
It was about winning. They both wanted to win the Ultimate Fighter so bad. It’s the Kia, it’s the win, it’s the contract you get, the whole thing.
It was about winning. They both wanted to win the Ultimate Fighter so bad. It’s the Kia, it’s the win, it’s the contract you get, the whole thing.
Lex Fridman
But I think at that point, you even forget all of that. When you’re in there, you probably just, there’s a primal thing where I’m not backing down.
But I think at that point, you even forget all of that. When you’re in there, you probably just, there’s a primal thing where I’m not backing down.
Dana White
Listen, they’re both bad dudes. They were both real fighters at the end of the day. That’s why the fight was so great. You know what I mean?
Listen, they’re both bad dudes. They were both real fighters at the end of the day. That’s why the fight was so great. You know what I mean?
Lex Fridman
They just throw all the caution to the wind and just fight. Those are some of the greatest moments in the FC too when the technique is falls apart and you’re just like, well, fuck it.
They just throw all the caution to the wind and just fight. Those are some of the greatest moments in the FC too when the technique is falls apart and you’re just like, well, fuck it.
Dana White
Well, it’s because you’re in those deep rounds. You’ve been through a war now it’s all about heart and dog, who can dig deeper and who’s got it and who wants it. I mean, we all know when that moment happens in a fight, when you see that both of these guys are fucking exhausted.
Well, it’s because you’re in those deep rounds. You’ve been through a war now it’s all about heart and dog, who can dig deeper and who’s got it and who wants it. I mean, we all know when that moment happens in a fight, when you see that both of these guys are fucking exhausted.
And for people that are watching this, people that don’t know a lot about… Everybody thinks they know a lot about fighting. 99.9% of the people out there don’t know fucking jack shit about fighting or what it takes to do what these people do. But when you get into those later rounds and fatigue sets in, and then fatigue makes you start to fucking doubt yourself, and then you start to wonder, can I even make it through the rest of this round?
And then you start to think, am I going to fucking die right now? And these kids dig fucking deep. And they just, like you said, all the other shit flies out the window and now they’re just on fucking autopilot to fight and win. Those are definitely the best fights you’ll ever see in any combat sport.
Lex Fridman
I mean, that saying is true. The exhaustion makes cowards of us all. I mean, there’s something about… Because I’ve competed a lot in jujitsu. There’s the violence of being hit too, but even just exhaustion, it makes you question everything.
I mean, that saying is true. The exhaustion makes cowards of us all. I mean, there’s something about… Because I’ve competed a lot in jujitsu. There’s the violence of being hit too, but even just exhaustion, it makes you question everything.
Dana White
So true.
So true.
Lex Fridman
It just takes you to some weird place where your brain starts to think you’re going to die for sure. Your brain starts to think, why am I doing this? All these excuses, all this.
It just takes you to some weird place where your brain starts to think you’re going to die for sure. Your brain starts to think, why am I doing this? All these excuses, all this.
Dana White
I love that shit.
I love that shit.
Lex Fridman
And then…
And then…
Dana White
I love that shit.
I love that shit.
Lex Fridman
The truly heroic action is to say, “Fuck it,” in that moment and just get in there.
The truly heroic action is to say, “Fuck it,” in that moment and just get in there.
Dana White
When you think about these fights that you see in the UFC every fucking Saturday when these men and women get to this point where they’ve been in a dog fight, yet they keep fucking going and you keep trying to win. You can’t imagine what’s going on inside their heads. Self-doubt and all these other things that come into play when exhaustion sets in and they fucking power through it.
When you think about these fights that you see in the UFC every fucking Saturday when these men and women get to this point where they’ve been in a dog fight, yet they keep fucking going and you keep trying to win. You can’t imagine what’s going on inside their heads. Self-doubt and all these other things that come into play when exhaustion sets in and they fucking power through it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, those moments, sometimes they don’t have a glorious knockout at the end. But your decision in the third round or the fifth round to still keep pushing forward, not running.
Yeah, those moments, sometimes they don’t have a glorious knockout at the end. But your decision in the third round or the fifth round to still keep pushing forward, not running.
Dana White
100%.
100%.
Lex Fridman
That doesn’t matter what happened. That is a person winning a battle over themselves.
That doesn’t matter what happened. That is a person winning a battle over themselves.
Dana White
So true. It’s so true, and it happens every fucking weekend. It’s so impressive. I say it all the time. The people that are involved in this sport are this much of the population. The people that make it to the top five are incredibly unique, special human beings, man. It’s fucking awesome.
So true. It’s so true, and it happens every fucking weekend. It’s so impressive. I say it all the time. The people that are involved in this sport are this much of the population. The people that make it to the top five are incredibly unique, special human beings, man. It’s fucking awesome.
Gambling
Lex Fridman
You love gambling.
You love gambling.
Dana White
I do.
I do.
Lex Fridman
What’s the biggest win of your gambling career, maybe psychologically, if not financially?
What’s the biggest win of your gambling career, maybe psychologically, if not financially?
Dana White
Well, two things. I won $1,000,000 hand one night. It’s happened one time. $1,000,000 hand one night at Mandalay Bay. And then one summer I beat Caesars for 12 million throughout the summer.
Well, two things. I won $1,000,000 hand one night. It’s happened one time. $1,000,000 hand one night at Mandalay Bay. And then one summer I beat Caesars for 12 million throughout the summer.
Lex Fridman
Throughout the summer.
Throughout the summer.
Dana White
Yeah. Then I’m on a pretty good run right now too.
Yeah. Then I’m on a pretty good run right now too.
Lex Fridman
Now this is blackjack?
Now this is blackjack?
Dana White
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
What’s the biggest loss?
What’s the biggest loss?
Dana White
The biggest loss was… Here is… I would call this the biggest loss for many different reasons. This is what you live and you learn in life and you figure things out as you go along. One night I’m over at the Rio and they got big suites over there. I go over there with some buddies and we got one of the suites and we have some dinner and we start drinking. We’re having some drinks at dinner and blah, blah, blah. Starts to ramp up, having a good time.
The biggest loss was… Here is… I would call this the biggest loss for many different reasons. This is what you live and you learn in life and you figure things out as you go along. One night I’m over at the Rio and they got big suites over there. I go over there with some buddies and we got one of the suites and we have some dinner and we start drinking. We’re having some drinks at dinner and blah, blah, blah. Starts to ramp up, having a good time.
And I make my way down to the Thai limit room. We start gambling. And I continue to drink having a blast. I end up leaving and going home that night, and I lost 80 grand. I wake up the next morning, I’m like, fuck. Those motherfuckers got me for 80,000 last night and dah, dah, dah, dah, dah.
I’m at work the next day and the host over there calls me and he says, “Hey, Dana, are you coming back? Do you still need the room that you guys had where you ate and all this shit you stay?” And I said, “No, I don’t need the room, but don’t get too comfortable with my fucking 80 grand. I’m coming back for it.”
Dead fucking silence on the other end of the phone. And he’s like, “Dana, you lost $3 million last night.” I said, “What the fuck are you talking about? I only have a million and a half dollar credit line.” He goes, “Yeah, you made us call the GM of the hotel and you started calling him a fucking pussy and da, da, da, da, da.” And I went, “Yeah, no, that sounds like something I would do. Yeah.”
Lex Fridman
That’s the real number.
That’s the real number.
Dana White
That was the real number. And then there’s been a lot of cases where people are in Vegas and they’re like, “Oh, I lost all this money. And they were giving me free drinks and I drank too much, and I was taken advantage of.” No, you stupid motherfucker. Man up. You got fucking drunk. Alcohol is free, but you don’t have to fucking drink it. You know what I mean? And this was a huge learning lesson for me. I never drank again when I was playing cards after that night. But yeah, when you asked me, that’s the one that stands out…
That was the real number. And then there’s been a lot of cases where people are in Vegas and they’re like, “Oh, I lost all this money. And they were giving me free drinks and I drank too much, and I was taken advantage of.” No, you stupid motherfucker. Man up. You got fucking drunk. Alcohol is free, but you don’t have to fucking drink it. You know what I mean? And this was a huge learning lesson for me. I never drank again when I was playing cards after that night. But yeah, when you asked me, that’s the one that stands out…
Lex Fridman
That one came back right now.
That one came back right now.
Dana White
In my head the most as far as having a bad loss. And then of course I said, “Call the GM,” and I started calling him a pussy at three o’clock in the morning.
In my head the most as far as having a bad loss. And then of course I said, “Call the GM,” and I started calling him a pussy at three o’clock in the morning.
Lex Fridman
Of course you did.
Of course you did.
Dana White
That is something I would absolutely do.
That is something I would absolutely do.
Lex Fridman
How do you deal with those psychologically? When you gamble, maybe this applies to fighting too, do you love winning or hate losing more?
How do you deal with those psychologically? When you gamble, maybe this applies to fighting too, do you love winning or hate losing more?
Dana White
They go hand in hand. The way that I play is I live in Vegas, so 2024 is a war for me. I go to war in ’24. Okay. All these nights that I play are little battles inside the war that I will fight in ’24. Now, at the end of the year, we will tally up all these little battles and see where I stand on wins and losses.
They go hand in hand. The way that I play is I live in Vegas, so 2024 is a war for me. I go to war in ’24. Okay. All these nights that I play are little battles inside the war that I will fight in ’24. Now, at the end of the year, we will tally up all these little battles and see where I stand on wins and losses.
And there’s lots of talk out there about my gambling, places that I’ve been kicked out of and things like that. And I do pretty well. I do pretty well, but it’s what I like to do. I don’t gamble in a way that I would ever hurt myself or hurt my family. I’m sure you’ve heard the Norm MacDonald stories. Norm MacDonald lost his entire personal wealth four times or something like that. Yeah, that’s not going to happen to me.
Lex Fridman
You manage it, but just psychologically you’re able to be even keel.
You manage it, but just psychologically you’re able to be even keel.
Dana White
Yeah. When I win, it’s awesome. It’s always great to win. Winning is a great feeling in business, in sports, in life, and definitely in gambling. Losing is never fun, but it’s part of the game. You know what I mean? If you want to be in the game and it’s sports, it’s business or whatever, there’s going to be wins and there’s going to be losses. And you have to take them both in stride and you have to be able to…
Yeah. When I win, it’s awesome. It’s always great to win. Winning is a great feeling in business, in sports, in life, and definitely in gambling. Losing is never fun, but it’s part of the game. You know what I mean? If you want to be in the game and it’s sports, it’s business or whatever, there’s going to be wins and there’s going to be losses. And you have to take them both in stride and you have to be able to…
There’s a of people… When you gamble and you lose and you go into a deep, dark depression, I’ve seen this with guys that do it, get depressed. Gambling isn’t for you. If you are the type of person that’s on social media and people say horrible things to you and you get depressed and da, da, you shouldn’t be on social media. You know what I mean?
These are all part of being in the game. When you’re in the fucking game, great things happen and really bad things happen, and you got to take it all in stride. And you got to pick yourself up the next day, strap your fucking shoes back on and get out there and go to fucking war again. That’s how it works.
Lex Fridman
That’s some goggin shit right there. All right. I love that motivational speech.
That’s some goggin shit right there. All right. I love that motivational speech.
Dana White
It’s the truth though.
It’s the truth though.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it is.
Yeah, it is.
Dana White
It’s the truth though.
It’s the truth though.
Lex Fridman
It’s true.
It’s true.
Dana White
Listen, every day when you get out of bed, life’s standing right there to kick you in the fucking face, man. Could be anything. Could be you get up and you walk downstairs, you got a fucking flat tire, and you’re late for work, and you got this and that. Life is going to throw all kinds of crazy shit at you, and you have to be ready for it, and you got to fucking deal with it. You can’t curl up into a ball. You can’t run away from it. You can’t hide. You have to take all this shit head on. You have to get up…
Listen, every day when you get out of bed, life’s standing right there to kick you in the fucking face, man. Could be anything. Could be you get up and you walk downstairs, you got a fucking flat tire, and you’re late for work, and you got this and that. Life is going to throw all kinds of crazy shit at you, and you have to be ready for it, and you got to fucking deal with it. You can’t curl up into a ball. You can’t run away from it. You can’t hide. You have to take all this shit head on. You have to get up…
Every day when I get up out of bed, I strap up and I’m getting ready for fucking war. Because I know I’m coming in here. I know a bunch of bad shit’s going to happen that I’m going to have to fucking deal with. And if that’s not bad enough, when I finally get out of here, I’m probably going to go to the casino and I’m going to get into another fucking war. You know what I mean?
I thrive in chaos. I actually love chaos. Everybody talks about retiring. Fuck that shit. What am I going to do when I retire? What would I do? I like to go to war. I like to battle. I like to win. Sometimes I lose, but then I have to come back from the loss. And I love to build brands. I love to set short term and long-term goals and then knock them all down. This is just the stuff that excites me.
And whether it’s business or gambling. I like being a fan of things too. I like live music. When I find a band that I like, I get excited to go watch the band live or a Celtics game. I love the fucking Boston Celtics, and I love going to the games and watching them. This is the year. Hopefully we’re going to fucking win it this year. These are all things that make me happy and excite me in my life.
And it’s funny because there’s this post that I post maybe three, four nights a week. I also love this city. I can’t tell if the city of Las Vegas was built for me or I was built for this fucking city, but I love it. And there’s this turn on Summerlin Parkway every night, and it’s dark. And from there you can see the entire city, and it’s all fucking lights and it’s badass.
And I’m usually driving home after a fucking incredible day. This amazing day and this unbelievable fucking life I have, and I have this just moment of gratitude. Every time I take that turn and I’m like, God damn, I love this fucking city. And just every night when I go home, I’m just so happy and grateful for this life that I have.
Lex Fridman
You’re grateful, you’re celebrating. Even if the day is full of shit, full of problems, you have to solve all of this. You’re still able to put that behind you, just turn it off?
You’re grateful, you’re celebrating. Even if the day is full of shit, full of problems, you have to solve all of this. You’re still able to put that behind you, just turn it off?
Dana White
I love that too. I love problem solving. I love taking things that seem impossible. Fucking what’s been shit on more than this company right here? Power Slap, right? This thing’s a fucking beast. It’s an absolute beast. In 13 months, that’s the most successful thing I’ve ever been a part of. And I love every fucking minute of it, especially the negativity. I love negativity.
I love that too. I love problem solving. I love taking things that seem impossible. Fucking what’s been shit on more than this company right here? Power Slap, right? This thing’s a fucking beast. It’s an absolute beast. In 13 months, that’s the most successful thing I’ve ever been a part of. And I love every fucking minute of it, especially the negativity. I love negativity.
Lex Fridman
You almost feed on it. That’s great. That’s great. You’re built for this.
You almost feed on it. That’s great. That’s great. You’re built for this.
Dana White
I eat that shit for breakfast, man. I love it.
I eat that shit for breakfast, man. I love it.
Lex Fridman
What’s your favorite movie about Vegas, Casino?
What’s your favorite movie about Vegas, Casino?
Dana White
Yeah, it would have to be Casino. No doubt about it.
Yeah, it would have to be Casino. No doubt about it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Dana White
You ever see a movie that changed your life, that actually impacted your life in some way, shape, or form?
You ever see a movie that changed your life, that actually impacted your life in some way, shape, or form?
Lex Fridman
Probably.
Probably.
Dana White
Which one?
Which one?
Lex Fridman
That’s a good question. I’ll have to think. Well, I have a lot, a lot. Casino could be one of them, probably taught me about women. Forrest Gump for me is a simple movie, but it was a really good movie to show. Because I’ve been really fortunate in my life over and over and over, and I don’t think I deserve any of it. I just always felt like Forrest Gump. When I finally saw it really connected with me. It was like, okay, this universe works in weird ways and stuff just materializes. And you just be good to people, put that good karma out there and it happens for you. That was a movie like that.
That’s a good question. I’ll have to think. Well, I have a lot, a lot. Casino could be one of them, probably taught me about women. Forrest Gump for me is a simple movie, but it was a really good movie to show. Because I’ve been really fortunate in my life over and over and over, and I don’t think I deserve any of it. I just always felt like Forrest Gump. When I finally saw it really connected with me. It was like, okay, this universe works in weird ways and stuff just materializes. And you just be good to people, put that good karma out there and it happens for you. That was a movie like that.
Dana White
I’m actually very superstitious about that. I believe that what you put out, you get back. And I believe that when you have, you should take care of other people and you should always try to bring people up with you and all that kind of stuff. But the movie that changed the whole trajectory of my life was Vision Quest.
I’m actually very superstitious about that. I believe that what you put out, you get back. And I believe that when you have, you should take care of other people and you should always try to bring people up with you and all that kind of stuff. But the movie that changed the whole trajectory of my life was Vision Quest.
Lex Fridman
Oh, yeah. Well, yeah. That’s a good one too. Yeah.
Oh, yeah. Well, yeah. That’s a good one too. Yeah.
Dana White
Vision Quest, man, I fucking love that movie.
Vision Quest, man, I fucking love that movie.
Lex Fridman
That’s a good one.
That’s a good one.
Dana White
It’s basically, it’s telling the story of a kid who really wasn’t anybody in high school, and nobody knew who he was. He wasn’t popular or any of that kind of shit. And he decided that that was the year that he was going to make his mark. And he was a good wrestler at 178 pounds, but he was going to move down to 160-something to take on the Shute, the scariest guy and the whatever.
It’s basically, it’s telling the story of a kid who really wasn’t anybody in high school, and nobody knew who he was. He wasn’t popular or any of that kind of shit. And he decided that that was the year that he was going to make his mark. And he was a good wrestler at 178 pounds, but he was going to move down to 160-something to take on the Shute, the scariest guy and the whatever.
But there’s all these little things in the movie that really lay out what life is all about. One of the parts is he’s in a class and the teacher’s talking about some poem. And he says, “What does this poem mean to you?” Well, this girl’s walking through the park and all the leaves are falling off the trees, and she realizes that she’s going to die someday. And that a lot of people think they have all this time so they fucking waste it, and they never go out and do what they really set out to do or accomplish or do anything great in their life. That’s one meaning.
Then he’s got the guy that he works with at work, he’s cutting weight and his nose is bleeding and all this shit. And this guy keeps going, “Why the fuck are you doing this? Pick that thing up and eat it like a fucking man. This is ridiculous. I don’t know why you’re doing this to yourself, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.” Then when he meets the girl and he gets to the point where he feels like he wants to quit, where does he go? He goes to that guy’s fucking apartment because he knows when he shows up at this guy’s apartment, he’s going to go, “Yeah, fuck this shit.”
No, he went to work. He went to work to talk to him, and he wasn’t at work. He took the night off. He shows up at the shitty little fucking apartment that the guy lives in and the guy’s putting a suit and tie on and shit. He’s like, “They said you called in sick. What’s going on?” He’s like, “Well, yeah. Aren’t you wrestling this guy tonight?” And he’s like, “Yeah, but why would you? You’re going to get docked a night’s pay and all this other shit.” He says, “You know what, man?” Then it all gets laid out. I get the goosebumps even telling you this fucking part of it.
Lex Fridman
Is that the Pele speech?
Is that the Pele speech?
Dana White
Pele. Yeah. When he’s saying about, “I’m fucking cooking in an overnight hotel fucking thing, and I live in this shitty apartment. A human being can lift himself upside down and backwards and kick a ball into a fucking net, and the whole stadium goes crazy. And this guy runs around. And I’m sitting here in my fucking apartment alone and I start crying. Yeah. I start crying.”
Pele. Yeah. When he’s saying about, “I’m fucking cooking in an overnight hotel fucking thing, and I live in this shitty apartment. A human being can lift himself upside down and backwards and kick a ball into a fucking net, and the whole stadium goes crazy. And this guy runs around. And I’m sitting here in my fucking apartment alone and I start crying. Yeah. I start crying.”
The guy who’s been shitting on him the whole fucking time actually really respects him for what he’s done and sees what this kid is capable of doing and all this shit. This fucking movie spoke to me on so many different levels. And I think it’s probably the most underrated movie of all time when you really break down the meaning of what this movie is about. And it really fucking spoke to me.
Lex Fridman
That’s probably the greatest movie on one-on-one combat…
That’s probably the greatest movie on one-on-one combat…
Dana White
I would agree.
I would agree.
Lex Fridman
Ever made.
Ever made.
Dana White
I would agree. And especially if you can really hear the messages that it’s giving you in this movie, it’s excellent. You know it’s funny. They just did the… And I saw this after the fact, which completely fucking pissed me off. They did the 25 year or the 30-year thing. It was filmed in Spokane, Washington. They showed the movie at a movie theater there, and the cast members came out and spoke about it. I would’ve fucking flown there for that. Are you shitting me? I’d have been there in fucking 30 seconds to go up there and be a part of that. That movie literally changed my life.
I would agree. And especially if you can really hear the messages that it’s giving you in this movie, it’s excellent. You know it’s funny. They just did the… And I saw this after the fact, which completely fucking pissed me off. They did the 25 year or the 30-year thing. It was filmed in Spokane, Washington. They showed the movie at a movie theater there, and the cast members came out and spoke about it. I would’ve fucking flown there for that. Are you shitting me? I’d have been there in fucking 30 seconds to go up there and be a part of that. That movie literally changed my life.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I suppose me too. It made me want to wrestle. I mean, probably the reason I was… Maybe it made me fall in love with wrestling.
Yeah, I suppose me too. It made me want to wrestle. I mean, probably the reason I was… Maybe it made me fall in love with wrestling.
Dana White
Well, you know what’s funny? I wasn’t even into wrestling at all, and I didn’t have to be for that movie to…
Well, you know what’s funny? I wasn’t even into wrestling at all, and I didn’t have to be for that movie to…
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s this basic human story.
Yeah, it’s this basic human story.
Dana White
It’s such a great movie.
It’s such a great movie.
Lex Fridman
I mean, that’s what fighting does. It brings out the basic, the humanity of a person really, for the people that choose to step up and step in the ring. And then chase greatness and actually do it from against the long odds. That’s why it’s a beautiful game.
I mean, that’s what fighting does. It brings out the basic, the humanity of a person really, for the people that choose to step up and step in the ring. And then chase greatness and actually do it from against the long odds. That’s why it’s a beautiful game.
Dana White
And it’s so true. I mean, when you think about, I’m 54 years old right now, like that. I mean, it just fucking flew by. And you think when you’re young that you have all this time. You have no time. There’s no time. I mean one of the quotes on the wall in the gym in there is, “There is no tomorrow,” from Rocky III. There is no tomorrow. Fuck that shit. Let’s get all this shit done today.
And it’s so true. I mean, when you think about, I’m 54 years old right now, like that. I mean, it just fucking flew by. And you think when you’re young that you have all this time. You have no time. There’s no time. I mean one of the quotes on the wall in the gym in there is, “There is no tomorrow,” from Rocky III. There is no tomorrow. Fuck that shit. Let’s get all this shit done today.
Mortality
Lex Fridman
Do you think about your death?
Do you think about your death?
Dana White
Man, I’m not afraid of death. Not even a little bit. I’m not afraid of it. I don’t know if that’ll be the case when I’m facing it, when I’m looking down the barrel of it, laying in a hospital bed somewhere.
Man, I’m not afraid of death. Not even a little bit. I’m not afraid of it. I don’t know if that’ll be the case when I’m facing it, when I’m looking down the barrel of it, laying in a hospital bed somewhere.
Lex Fridman
But for now, just squeezing as much as you can out of it.
But for now, just squeezing as much as you can out of it.
Dana White
100%. I literally, I don’t even like to sleep. My life is so fucking awesome, I don’t even want to go to bed at night. I don’t even want to go to sleep. I want to stay up fucking, I wish I could do fucking 24 hours and never have to sleep. That’s how much I love my life.
100%. I literally, I don’t even like to sleep. My life is so fucking awesome, I don’t even want to go to bed at night. I don’t even want to go to sleep. I want to stay up fucking, I wish I could do fucking 24 hours and never have to sleep. That’s how much I love my life.
Lex Fridman
What has watching thousands of fights over the years taught you about human nature, about us humans?
What has watching thousands of fights over the years taught you about human nature, about us humans?
Dana White
I don’t care what color you are, what country you come from or what language you speak, we’re all human beings. Fighting’s in our DNA. We get it and we like it. And it’s true. Fighting is in our DNA. It’s a part of who we are.
I don’t care what color you are, what country you come from or what language you speak, we’re all human beings. Fighting’s in our DNA. We get it and we like it. And it’s true. Fighting is in our DNA. It’s a part of who we are.
And no matter where you are, if a fight breaks out, it creates this fucking energy, this buzz, this sense of fear. I mean, a lot of different emotions happen in people when fights break out. But one thing that is always the case, everybody’s watching, man. Everybody’s, fucking all of their eyes are on the fight.
I mean, we were just in Mexico, fucking fight broke out in the good seats right here with these seats that are super expensive. And security never fucking came. They just let these guys fight until they gassed out. And then everybody put their chairs back together and snapped back down and fucking. I literally got up from my table, walked over, and was watching this fight at the fights.
Lex Fridman
At the fights. I mean humans fight and humans love watching fighting.
At the fights. I mean humans fight and humans love watching fighting.
Dana White
Absolutely. And that was my thought process going into buying the UFC, and I believe that this would work everywhere. And thank God we were right.
Absolutely. And that was my thought process going into buying the UFC, and I believe that this would work everywhere. And thank God we were right.
Lex Fridman
Well, Dana, thank you for bringing this very human thing of fighting, the art of it, the science of it, the heroic stories, the vision quest stories of it all.
Well, Dana, thank you for bringing this very human thing of fighting, the art of it, the science of it, the heroic stories, the vision quest stories of it all.
Dana White
Boom.
Boom.
Lex Fridman
Really appreciate you talking today, brother.
Really appreciate you talking today, brother.
Dana White
Thank you. Pleasure, buddy. Thank you for the kind words.
Thank you. Pleasure, buddy. Thank you for the kind words.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Dana White. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Muhammad Ali. “Impossible is just a big word thrown around by small men who find it easier to live in a world they’ve been given than to explore the power they have to change it. Impossible is not a fact, it’s an opinion. Impossible is not a declaration, it’s a dare.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Dana White. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Muhammad Ali. “Impossible is just a big word thrown around by small men who find it easier to live in a world they’ve been given than to explore the power they have to change it. Impossible is not a fact, it’s an opinion. Impossible is not a declaration, it’s a dare.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Annie Jacobsen: Nuclear War, CIA, KGB, Aliens, Area 51, Roswell & Secrecy | Lex Fridman Podcast #420
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #420 with Annie Jacobsen.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
In addition to the Launch on Warning concept, there’s this other insane concept called Sole Presidential Authority. And you might think, in a democracy that’s impossible, right? You can’t just start a war. Well, you can just start a nuclear war if you are the commander in chief, the President of the United States. In fact, you’re the only one who can do that. We are one misunderstanding, one miscalculation away from nuclear Armageddon. No matter how nuclear war starts, it ends with everyone dead.
Let’s start with an immensely dark topic, nuclear war. How many people would a nuclear war between the United States and Russia kill?
First millions, then tens of millions, then hundreds of millions of people will die in the first 72 minutes of a nuclear war. And then, comes nuclear winter where the billions happen from starvation. And so, the shock power of all of this is meant for each and every one of us to say, “Wait, what?” This actually exists behind the veil of national security. Most people do not think about nuclear war on a daily basis, and yet hundreds of thousands of people in the nuclear command and control are at the ready in the event it happens.
And so, there begins this horrifying policy called Launch on Warning, right? And that’s the US counterattack. Meaning the reason that the United States is so ferociously watching for a nuclear launch somewhere around the globe is so that the nuclear command and control system in the US can move into action to immediately make a counterstrike. Because we have that policy, Launch on Warning, which is exactly like it says. It means the United States will not wait to absorb a nuclear attack. It will launch nuclear weapons in response before the bomb actually hits.
But the idea behind that is that nuclear war will unfold so fast only one person can be in charge. The president. He asks permission of no one. Not the Secretary of Defense, not the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, not the US Congress. So, built into that is this extraordinary speed you talk about, the six-minute window. And some people say, “That’s ridiculous. How do we know that six minute window?” Well, here’s the best hitting the nail on the head statement I can give you, which is in President Reagan’s memoirs, he refers to the six-minute window and he says… He calls it irrational, which it is. He says, “How can anyone make a decision to launch nuclear weapons based on a blip on a radar scope.” His words. “To unleash Armageddon.” And yet, that is the reality behind nuclear war.
I guess the question that kept coming up is how do we stop this? Is it inevitable that it’s going to be escalated to a full-on nuclear war that destroys everything? And it seems like it will be. It’s inevitable. In the position of the President, it’s almost inevitable that they have to respond.
And that only when Panetta became Secretary of Defense, he told me, did he really realize the weight of all of this, because he knew he would be the person that the president would turn to were he to be notified of a nuclear attack. And by the way, the Launch on Warning, it’s the ballistic missile seen from outer space by the satellite. And then, there also must be a second confirmation from a ground radar system. But in that process, which is just a couple minutes, everyone is getting ready to notify the president. And one of the first people that gets notified by NORAD or by STRATCOM or by NRO, these different parties that all see the early warning data, one of the first people that’s notified is the Secretary of Defense as well as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, because those two together are going to brief the president about, “Sir, you have six minutes to decide.”
And that’s where you realize the immediacy of all of this is so counter to imagining the scenario. And again, all the presidents come into office, I have learned, understanding the idea of deterrence, this idea that we have these massive arsenals of nuclear weapons pointed at one another ready to launch so that we never have nuclear war. But what we’re talking about now is, what if we did? What if we did? And what you’ve raised is this really spooky, eerie subtext of the world right now because many of the nuclear armed nations are in direct conflict with other nations. And for the first time in decades, nuclear threats are actually coming out of the mouths of leaders. This is shocking.
But when you think about those kinds of arsenals of just between the United States and Russia, and you realize everything can be launched in seconds and minutes, then you realize the madness of mad, this idea that no one would launch because it would assure everyone’s destruction. Yes. But what if someone did? And in my interviews with scores of top tier national security advisors, people who advise the president, people who are responsible for these decisions if they had to be made, every single one of them said it could happen. They didn’t say this would never happen. And so, the idea is worth thinking about because I believe that it pulls back the veil on a fundamental security that if someone were to use a tactical nuclear weapon, “Well, it’s just an escalation.” It’s far more than that.
He wanted to know the answer to your question as the guy in charge of it all. So, he hired this group of scientists who then, and still are in many ways, the supermen scientists of the Pentagon, and they’re called the JASON Scientists. Many conspiracies about them abound. I interviewed their founder and have interviewed many of them. But they whittled the number down to seconds specifically for Herb York. And it goes like, because this is where my jaw dropped. And I went, “Wow.” So, 26 minutes and 40 seconds from a launch pad in the Soviet Union to the East Coast. And it happens in three phases. Very simple. And interesting to remember, because then suddenly all of this makes more sense. Boost phase, mid-course phase and then terminal phase, okay?
Boost phase, five minutes. That’s when the rocket launches. So, you just imagine a rocket going off the launch pad and the fire beneath it. Again, that’s why the satellites can see it. Now it’s becoming visual, now it makes sense to me. Five minutes. And that’s where the rocket can be tracked. And then imagine learning, “Wait a minute. After five minutes, the rocket can no longer be seen from space. The satellite can only see the hot rocket exhaust.” Then the missile enters its mid-course phase, 20 minutes. And that’s the ballistic part of it, where it’s flying up at between 500 and 700 miles above the earth and moving very fast and with the earth until it gets very close to its target. And the last 100 seconds are terminal phase. It’s where the warhead re-enters the atmosphere and detonates.
26 minutes and 40 seconds. Now in my scenario, I open with North Korea launching a one megaton nuclear warhead at Washington DC. That’s the nihilistic madman maneuver. That’s the bolt out of the blue attack that everyone in Washington will tell you they’re afraid of. And North Korea has a little bit different geography. And so, I had MIT Professor Emeritus Ted Postol do the math, 33 minutes from a launch pad in Pyongyang to the East coast of the United States. You get the idea, it’s about 30 minutes.
But hopefully now that allows readers to suddenly see all this as a real… You almost see it as poetry, as terrible as that may sound. You can visualize it and suddenly it makes sense. And I think the sense-making part of it is really what I’m after in this book. Because I want people to understand, on the one hand, it’s incredibly simple, it’s just the people that have made it so complicated.
These things are like hell machines, and they’re moving around throughout the oceans, ours, Russia’s, China’s, maybe North Korea’s constantly. And we now know they’re sneaking up to the east and west coast of the United States within a couple hundred miles. How do we know that? Why do we know that? Well, I found a document inside of a budget that the defense department was going to Congress for more money recently and showed maps of precisely where these submarines… How close they were getting to the eastern seaboard.
The submarines take about 14 or 15 minutes from the launch command to actually launching. And that has to do, I surmise, with the location of the submarine, its depth. Some of these things are so highly classified and other details are shockingly available if you look deep enough, or if you ask enough questions, and you can go from one document to the next, to the next and really find these answers.
We don’t have those in America, because presumably the average American isn’t going to go for the ICBM road mobile launcher driving down the street in your town or city, which is why the Defense Department will justify we need the second strike capacity capability, the submarines, because… The wonky stuff that is worth looking into, if you really dig the book and are like, “Wait a minute.” It’s all footnoted where you can learn more about how these systems have changed over time. And why, more than anything, it’s very difficult to get out of this catch-22 conundrum that we need nuclear weapons to keep us safe. That is the real enigma. Because the other guys have them, right? And the other guys have-
And he told me the story about how, he said, “The football is with the president at all times, period.” They were traveling to Syria, and Clinton was meeting with President Assad. And they got into an elevator, Clinton and the Secret Service team, and one of Assad’s guys was like, “No.” About the mil aide. And Lou said it was like a standoff because there was no way they were not going to have the president with his football in an elevator. And it sums up. For me anyways, you realize what goes into every single one of these decisions. You realize the massive system of systems behind every item you might just see in passing and glancing on the news as you see the mil aide carrying that satchel. Well, what’s in that satchel? I really dug into that to report this book.
And so it’s described to me this way, the Pentagon bunker is the beating heart, the Cheyenne Mountain bunker is the brains, and the STRATCOM bunker is the muscle. The STRATCOM commander will receive word from the president, “Launch orders.” And then directs the 150,000 people beneath him what to do from the bunker beneath STRATCOM. He gets the orders, then he has to run out of the building and jump onto what’s called the doomsday plane. We’ll get into that in a minute. Let me just finish the… I mean, but again-
There are 40 of them in Alaska, and there are four of them at Vandenberg Air Force Base in Santa Barbara. And they are responsible at about nine minutes into the scenario. After the ICBM has finished that five-minute boost phase we talked about, now it’s in mid-course phase, and the ground radar systems have identified, yes, this is an incoming ICBM. And now the interceptor missiles have to launch. It’s essentially shooting a missile with a missile. Inside the interceptor, which is just a big giant rocket, in its nose cone, it has what’s called the aptly named Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle. There’s no explosives in that thing. It’s literally just going to take out the warhead ideally with force. So one of them is going mach 20. I mean, the speeds at which these two moving objects hurtling through space are going is astonishing. And the fact that interception is even possible is really remarkable, but it’s only possible 50% of the time.
So in the scenario, I have the nuclear ICBM coming in. The interceptor missiles try to shoot down the warhead. The capability is not like what’s called shoot and look. There’s not enough time to go, “And we’re going to try to get it. We missed it. Okay, let’s go for another one.” So you have to go… So in my scenario, we fire off four, which is about what I was told, one to four, because you’re worried about the next one that’s going to come in. You’re going to use up 10% of your missile force, of your interceptor force on one, and all four miss. And that’s totally plausible.
The mistake was that there was a training tape with a nuclear war scenario. We haven’t even begun to talk about the nuclear war scenarios that the Pentagon runs. An actual VHS training tape had been incorrectly inserted into a system at the Pentagon. And so this nuclear launch showed up at that bunker beneath the Pentagon and at the bunker beneath STRATCOM because they’re connected, as being real. And then it was like, oh, whoops. It’s actually a simulation test tape. And Perry described to me what that was like, the pause in his spirit and his mind and his heart when he realized, “I’m about to have to tell the president that he needs to launch nuclear weapons.” And he learned just in the nick of time that it was an error. And that’s one of five examples.
And he had a lot to do with me feeling like I could write this book from a human point of view and not just from the mechanized systems. Because, and I only lightly touch upon this because it’s such a fast sweeping scenario, but Perry, for example, spent his whole life dedicated to building weapons of war only later in life to realize this is madness. And he shared with me that it was that idea about one’s grandchildren inheriting these nuclear arsenals and the lack of wisdom that comes with their origin stories. When you’re involved in it in the ground up, apparently it has perhaps you’re a different kind of steward of these systems than if you just inherit them, and they are pages in a manual.
And I write about Proud Prophet in the book because it was super significant in many ways. One, it was happening right… In 1983, it was an insane moment in nuclear arsenals. There were 60,000 nuclear weapons. Right now there’s 12,500. So we’ve come a long way, baby, in terms of disarmament. But there were 60,000. And by the way, that was not the ultimate high. The ultimate high was 70,000. This is insane. And Ronald Reagan was president, and he orders this war game called Proud Prophet, and everyone that mattered was involved. They were running the war game scenarios.
And what we learned from his declassification is that no matter how nuclear war starts, there was a bunch of different scenarios, with NATO involved, without NATO, all different scenarios. No matter how nuclear war starts, it ends in Armageddon. It ends with everyone dead. I mean, this is shocking when you think about that coupled with the idea that all that has been done in the 40 some odd years since is, okay, let’s just really lean in even harder to this theoretical phenomena of deterrence. Because that’s all it is, it’s just a statement, Lex. Deterrence will hold. Okay. Well, what if it doesn’t? Well, we know from Proud Prophet what happens if it doesn’t.
Well, what is completely unknown to 98% of the planet is that not only do the Russians have a very flawed satellite system so that they cannot interpret what is happening properly, but there is an absolutely existential flaw in the system, which Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta confirmed with me, which is that our ICBMs do not have enough range. If we launch a counterattack against, say, North Korea, our ICBMs must fly over Russia. They must fly over Russia. So imagine saying, “Oh, no, no. These 82 warheads that are going to actually strike the Northern Korean peninsula are not coming for you, Russia.” Our adversary right now that we’re saber-rattling with. “Just trust us.” And that is where nuclear war unfolds into Armageddon. And that hole in national security is shocking. And as Panetta told me, no one wants to discuss it.
We haven’t even begun to talk about the fact that at the same time, these advisors also have a parallel concern, and that’s called continuity of government. So while they’re trying to advise on the nuclear counterstrike in response to the incoming nuclear missile, they have to be thinking, “How are we going to keep the government functioning when the missiles start hitting, when the bombs start going off?” And that is about getting yourself out of the Pentagon, let’s say. Getting yourself to one of these nuclear bunkers that I write about at length in the book.
So how much can you ask of a human, right? Because it comes down to a human. Secretary of Defense is a human. Imagine that job while trying to advise the president. And then there’s also a really interesting term which I learned about called jamming the president, which is often understood in Washington that the military advisors would, we don’t know if this is legit, we’ve never seen it put to the test, but jamming the president means the military advisors are going to push for a really aggressive counter attack immediately.
And again, you’re the president who’s not really been paying attention to this because he has many other things to deal with. Speed is not conducive to wisdom.
But that idea that the commander in chief and everyone within the national security apparatus should be making really good decisions about war. It’s the oldest cliche in the world that the wars are fought by the young kids. It’s not a cliche; it’s true. And so the character part about the president should be in play whether we’re thinking about nuclear war or any war, in my opinion.
But to which degree is it really on the president versus to the people advising?
And then this astonishing thing happens. The president takes out his wallet. He has a card in it that’s colloquially called the biscuit, and that card with the codes matches up an item in the briefcase in the football that then is received by an officer underneath the Pentagon in that bunker. It’s a call and response, Lex. It’s like alpha zeta, that’s it. And then back so that the individual in the bunker realizes they are getting the command from the president. And then that order is passed to STRATCOM. And STRATCOM, the commander of STRATCOM, and I interviewed a former commander of STRATCOM, commander of STRATCOM then follows orders, which is he delivers the launch orders to the nuclear triad, and what’s done is done.
So the caveat I would say to McDuff’s answer of easier to win the Powerball is that if the commander of STRATCOM interpreted the president’s behavior to be unreliable, to be non-presidential, then dot dot dot. But now you’re into some really radical territory.
And then, I don’t know, there’ve been 100 people that have been directly involved in nuclear weapons along the way. Billy Waugh, who was my main sort of central figure in a book I wrote about the CIA’s paramilitary called Surprise, Kill, Vanish. And Waugh HALO jumped a tactical nuclear weapon into the Nevada test site with a small team. Almost unknown to anyone, right? Only recently declassified. And so his position was like, “Tactical nuclear weapons may end up being used.”
I’m trying to speak here to the scope of different people I have interviewed over the years. And what has happened is as I’ve gotten closer to the present day, in arrears, there seems to be a growing movement from some of these Cold warriors off the position of, “Nuclear weapons make us great and strong,” toward “Something must be done to reduce this threat.”
What was interesting in interviewing him was also this recent very, very dangerous shift in Russian nuclear policy, which is this: Many Russian experts will tell you that Russia has always maintained that it never had a launch on warning policy. Now, I don’t know if I believe that’s true, but I’m just telling you what they say. And this is coming from the generals, the Cold War generals in Soviet Russia saying, “Oh, no, no, no. We would wait.” They were kind of playing the noble warrior. “We would wait to absorb a nuclear attack until we launched.” Okay? So many Americans experts will tell you that that’s just posturing and propaganda. But that was their official position, and that changed just two years ago when Putin gave a speech and he said that their position had changed, that they will no longer wait to absorb an attack. That once they learn of, how did he phrase it? He called it like the trajectory of the missiles, which is a way of, we’re talking about parody, the same way we see the missile coming over in Midcourse. Putin made that same statement, and said, “We would launch.”
We’re talking about millimeters and inches. We’re talking about the Defense Department knowing that, oh, seven and a half miles out the upholstery on cars will spontaneously combust. The pine needles will catch on fire. They will start more fires. You have all kinds of mayhem and chaos happening based on reported facts from observations. And this is really shocking and grotesque at the same time.
And then you have a sucking action. Many people are familiar with what the nuclear mushroom cloud looks like. Its stem actually creates, and again, this is from physicists who advise the Defense Department on this, the sucking up into the nuclear stem, 300 mile an hour winds. You’re talking about people miles out getting sucked up into that stem. When you see the mushroom cloud, Lex, in a nuclear war, that would be people. Those are like the remnants of people and of things in the cloud; 30, 40 mile wide mushroom cloud blocking out the sun, and that speaks nothing of the radiation poisoning that follows.
By the way, Craig Fugate was so transparently human with me, and I quote him directly in the book. But he spoke about, you asked me earlier about what would be going through the president’s mind, and we don’t know, I don’t know, but Craig Fugate told me what would be going through his mind. He said along the lines, I’m paraphrasing, it’s almost something you couldn’t even comprehend. It would just ruin you. His words are really powerful.
Of course, the FEMA director, in the scenario, is notified in that first window while the ballistic missile is on its way and no one in America yet knows. I have the FEMA director pull over to the side of the road and jump in a helicopter that’s sent for him to take him to the bunker that FEMA goes to, which is called Mount Weather. And so, Fugate was aware that, as FEMA director, you would likely be taken to a safe place, however many hours you’re going to be safe, or days or maybe weeks or maybe months.
But as I also learned from the cyber people I interviewed, that there’s a complete fallacy that these military bases can continue functioning. They run on diesel fuel, and when the fuel stops pumping, there’s no more generators.
There were all kinds of controversies about it when it came out, including the Defense Department saying it was Soviet propaganda, which it wasn’t. What the nuclear winter authors conceded back in the ’80s was that their modeling was just the best it could be based on what they had at the time. And so, now flash forward to where we are in 2024, and talking to Professor Toon who’s been working on this issue for all these decades since, he shared with me how the climate models today with the systems we have, the computer systems, reveal that actually nuclear winter is worse.
To answer your questions, the bombs stop falling, in my scenario, 72 minutes after they first launch. The bombs stop falling, and then the megafires begin. Each nuclear weapon will have, according to the Defense Department, a megafire that will burn between 100 and 300 square miles. 1000 weapons, 1500 weapons, think about those megafires. Everything is burning, forests, cities. Think about the pyrotoxins in all the cities. High-rises burning. All of this soot gets lofted into the air, according to Toon, some 300 billion pounds of soot. What happens? It blocks out the sun. Without sun, we have nuclear winter. We have a situation whereby ice sheets form. You’re talking about bodies of water in places like Iowa being frozen for 10 years.
If you have people living underground and you have this great thawing, and with that great thawing comes pathogens and plague. You have this system where the small-bodied animals, the insects and whatnot, begin reproducing really fast, and the larger body animals like you and me begin to go extinct. Professor Toon said it to me this way. He said, “66 million years ago, an asteroid hit Earth, killed all the dinosaurs and wiped out 70% of the species, and nuclear war would likely do the same.” And so, here we are talking about this because there is a difference. There’s nothing you can do about an asteroid, but there is something you can do about a nuclear war.
To really think about this idea, I looked at the oldest known archeological site in the world in Turkey, which is called Gobekli Tepe. It’s really fascinating to me because I interviewed one of the two archeologists who first found this site in the early ’90s. The lead archeologist was a guy named Klaus Schmidt, and Michael Morsch was the young graduate student who was with him. Morsch’s description of coming upon this rumored to be site, there was something called a wishing tree on the site, which I just found so human and perfect, that it was this magical place, and it was Locatable because there was a wishing tree on a hill. It’s where people went to wish and to hope that their wishes came true. I mean, how human is that?
That is where beneath the wishing tree, in the shadow of the wishing tree, there was a tepe, which is a hill. Beneath that, there is the oldest known civilization in the world. 12,000 years ago, a group of hunter-gatherers built this site. Why? We don’t know. But I imagined through Morsch’s descriptions of coming upon. He tripped on a rock, he told me. He tripped over a stone that turned out to be the top part of a 12,000 year old sculpted man, giant pillar. He talked about coming upon that. And then, no one knows really what Gobekli Tepe was for.
That makes my mind try and answer the question you asked me internally, just as a human who’s here on earth for the amount of time I’m here. If there were a nuclear war, what would it be like? What would it be like when someone in the future, would we become archeologists one day? Would civilization rebuild? Would we develop computers? Who knows? It’s interesting to think about. I hope we never have to.
Maybe some religious ideas will persist. Some stories and myths will persist. But all the wisdom we’ve gathered, higher level sort of technological wisdom would be gone. That’s terrifying to think about. Maybe even, as you touch on, the very fact of nuclear war might be forgotten. The lessons of nuclear war might be forgotten. That there are these weapons, sort of the obvious elephant in the room would be one of the things that’s completely forgotten or become so vague in the recollection of humans that our understanding will change. It’s almost as if a God descended on earth and destroyed everything. Maybe that’s how it will persist. Mythological interpretation of what nuclear weapons are. That’s terrifying because then it could repeat again.
Mitchell was vilified when he got back from the moon because it became known that he believed in things like extrasensory perception and this kind of mystical, metaphysical way of looking at the world. He really suffered from that. I mean, he was ridiculed and he lost a lot of his career and his friends. But what he said to me in our interview about his trip home from the moon answers that great filter question, I think, in a way I might want to adopt, which is this.
He said that as they were returning from the moon to earth, he looked down at the earth, and I’m paraphrasing him, I write all this in Phenomena, an earlier book, but the paraphrasing is that he looked down from the earth and it was 1971. He thought about all the conflict going on down below, particularly the Vietnam War where many of his friends were. And then, he looked behind him into the great vast galaxy. He had a moment, he says, that was like an epiphany. Not a near-death experience, but a sort of near-life experience where he believed that the human consciousness, which is where so much of this thoughtfulness about metaphysics and ESP perhaps come from.
Mitchell’s theory, was that human consciousness, the way to understand it, had something to do with realizing that man’s inner life and man’s outer life are deeply connected, in the same way that man is connected to the galaxy. He said it much more eloquently, but you kind of get the idea. I think it’s why humans have always loved to look up, that there’s more there. It’s like the big version of the wishing tree, what do I wish for for myself? What is maybe, perhaps, the realignment of thinking for those of us in search of happiness instead of war. What does it mean to have a conscience, to have consciousness? What does it mean to be a thinking person? What does it mean to be on this earth, to be born, to live, to die? And then, there is legacy. And so, all of those ideas are, I think, foster the kind of conversation that de-escalates conflict.
For me, thinking about alien civilizations out there is really the same kind of question, which is, what are we? What is this? What are we doing here? How do we come here? Why does it seem to be so magical and beautiful and powerful? Now, where’s it going? Because it feels like we’re really, perhaps for the first time in history, are in a moment where we can destroy ourselves. And so, naturally you ask, well, where’s others like us? Perhaps, are we inevitably going to a place where we’ll destroy ourselves? Is it basically inevitable that we destroy ourselves? We become too powerful and insufficiently wise to know what to do with that power? But like you said, probably the answers to that are in here. We don’t need to look out there.
I’d love to ask you about the extrasensory perception. You’ve written, like you said, the book Phenomena on the secret history of the US government’s investigations into extrasensory perception and psychokinesis. What are some of the more interesting extrasensory abilities that were explored by the government, and maybe just in general, ESP. What is it? What do you know of it?
And then, I really began thinking, well, before science and technology, sort of the supernatural ruled the world. The Oracle of Delphi in Greece exists before the common era rulers to go and beg to learn from the powers that be what was going to happen. All ESP programs, I think, pull from that origin story, the leader’s desire to know. And so, I really found it amazing that many people think these systems, or rather these programs, started in the ’70s. I learned they actually began right after World War II. That was because, and in my reporting, I find all things sort of always circle back to the Third Reich, to the Nazis.
The Nazis had a massive occult program, an ESP program, psychokinesis program, astrology. Both Hitler and Himmler were deeply interested in these occult concepts. After I learned from records at the National Archives that after the war, half of everything went to the Soviet Union, and I’m talking about the trove of Nazi documents from which the superpowers were then going to learn to fight future wars, and half of them went to the United States. And so, we got this trove of documents about all of this, and the Soviets got the other. And so, it set off a kind of psychic arms race, which in a weird way paralleled the nuclear arms race, which we’ve been talking about, in as much that it led one side to constantly wonder what the other side had.
When the military stepped in and got involved in the programs, that was a complete disaster, in my opinion, because the military needs to control everything in a mechanized, systematic way. And so, they started, for example, teaching people to be psychic, which is a really, really, really bad idea.
Flash forward to where we are today, these programs still exist. There’s a Navy program which is working, based on a lot of data that came back from the war on terror, with certain soldiers knowing, “Wait, don’t walk down that path. There is an IED there.” They call this the spidey sense, and they actually have a program that works from this. These things never go away. They circle around in terms of being made fun of and then taken seriously, and a little of this and of that. My biggest takeaway from writing that book was a quote that I referenced in the beginning, which is the Thomas theorem, and it says, if men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences.
I mean, my first learning about the CIA came from the work I did on the Area 51 book about their aerial reconnaissance programs, which were set up again to prevent World War III, nuclear World War III. It was this idea that information was king. The U-2 spy pane was developed out at Area 51. I interviewed Hervey Stockman, the first man to fly over the Soviet Union in a U-2, gathered all this intelligence, prevented wars. Later, I wrote a book about the CIA’s paramilitary, Surprise, Kill, Vanish. Just when I was thinking, “Wow, the CIA is doing all this amazing non-kinetic activity with aerial reconnaissance, then you learn about their kill programs,” and that’s a whole different set of issues.
Sometimes people will tell me things. They’ll say, “Annie, this is off the record. This is for you to know about me on deep background because I want you to know who I am,” and that’s powerful and a lot of times personal. It’s personal. It’s about their personal life, and it isn’t apropos to what I’m writing about, but I need to know that. That’s where it gets conflicted, in a good way, because you realize where we’re all such creatures of our personal lives. You have a professional life where national security are in your hands. I don’t know what that is like.
By the way, the reason they’re talking to me is because they’re still alive and so many of their colleagues are dead. It gives them also a wisdom about life, about sacrifice, not in cliched sort of nationalistic jingoistic terms whatsoever. I’m talking real. What is their real truth?
When I went to Vietnam with Billy Waugh, I mean, the details are just every detail. I mean, starting with the fact that he showed up at my house with a giant suitcase and a bunch of clothes, dry cleaning, pressed clothes in plastic hangers, carrying them. I’m like, “Billy, we’re going to Vietnam and we’re going back into the jungle to find the Oscar-8 battle site. What are you carrying?” He got really mad at me, did not like anyone correcting him. I got my husband on the job, like, “Kevin, you got to sort this out.”
What transpired was that Billy Waugh had never taken a trip for personal reasons. He operated, I think, in 62 countries, every single time for the CIA. It would go like this, Billy, go to there and get to there, and that’s what he would do. When he arrived, whatever he needed, he would just get. It’s not a fashion trip. He had no idea how to pack for an overseas trip. This was like, “Oh my God, how can you not have the hugest smile on your face going into this? I’m with a guy whose 89 years old.”
He’d had eight Purple Hearts from Vietnam. I mean, he operated against Osama bin Laden 10 years before 9/11. He went after bin Laden in Afghanistan when he was 72. He went after Qaddafi during the Arab spring when he was 82, and now here he is with me going to Hanoi. The details, those human details. But my husband repacked his bag and got him a proper suitcase that was carryable and small and he wasn’t trailing the hangers, but it was the trip home in the taxi that I got at this really big reveal.
Billy reached into that small suitcase my husband had given him and pulled out a rolled up American flag. He had taken this flag, because I had tried to help him pack and he wouldn’t let me, and I just thought it was like an old guy being stubborn, but he didn’t want me to see that he was bringing an American flag to Vietnam, which is not legal. He wanted to bring that flag and take it around everywhere with him, as he explained to me later, to honor all of his friends who died there 50 years ago.
And then, when the trip was finished, he gave me that flag and it’s in my office. That’s the kind of relationship that you can develop with people as a reporter, if you’re willing to go the extra mile with them, to trust them, that they’ll tell you things of value. To me, something like that is as of value as any secret mission I’m able to get declassified, because we are a nation of people.
Colonel Slater told me this one perk, I just love so much. They all had a hankering for lobster one day. And here they’re in the middle of the desert in Nevada, and they have these really fast planes, and they literally called, they arranged, they didn’t take the Oxcart out for that one, but they got some lobsters from Massachusetts delivered to them in record time. They didn’t even need to put them on ice. And again, those are these details where you’re like, at least for me, “Thank God I got these details. These guys are all passed now.”
Now, does that mean that every UFO sighting in the world has been a U-2? No, but I come from it from that lane of thinking, and there are so many strategic deception campaigns, and as I look over the decades of how these same UFO stories, and again, this is just my opinion based on my reporting, this narrative that keeps reoccurring, it seems to me like a very large catch- all to keep the public’s attention on that, not on that.
So look that up, and then you go, “Oh my God.” And to my eye, you can apply any of these other names substitute in Paul Bennewitz or any of the current individuals who really become convinced of X, Y, or Z, when in fact there’s a strategic deception campaign going on.
So if you believe that we’re alone in this universe, that’s a great motivator to build rockets and become multi-planetary and save ourselves, especially in the case of nuclear war, because otherwise, whatever this special sauce, this flame of consciousness will go out if we destroy ourselves on this earth. And for people like Elon, it’s too high of a probability that we destroy ourselves on earth not to try to become multi-planetary. In your book on Area 51, you propose an explanation that I think some people have criticized at the very end that this might’ve been a disinformation campaign from, I guess Stalin, that the Roswell incident was a remotely piloted plane with a quote, “grotesque child-sized aviator”. Just looking back at all that now, years later, what’s the probability that it’s true? What’s the probability it’s not?
And Stalin was also messing with the United States, messing with Truman, who sort of turned his back on him at Potsdam. And so this idea and the reason that the source is important, and unlike a lot of people, “I saw, I saw this, I saw that, I learned that,” was according to the source, once it was determined that this was a hoax and that Stalin was able to get a craft over the United States, and it crashed and it had people inside of it.
They were people that were sort of deformed and meant surgically altered to look like aliens. The United States government decided that it needed to know what on earth that was all about. And if it was possible for us to have the same program, this according to the source. And so it sounds preposterous, and if it was just someone saying, you might say, “Well, it’s ridiculous,” and get them onto another subject. But the difference was is this source who was very well-placed and friends with all of the other 75 people told me this as a confession, a real tearful confession. Because what he said is he was involved in the American program to do the same thing, and people died because there were human experiments that went on.
And I write about this in the last 12 pages of Area 51. It was an explosive revelation, and I felt very confident in writing this because the source wanted it written. Why? Because he said, “I’m dedicated to my country. I know about being committed to national security, and this kind of thing must never happen. And if you give people too much power, they would take advantage of it.” And he wanted it on the record. And his wife of 60 years did not know until after the book published, nor did his children. So after the book published, I was called to his house and sat there with his family and they said, “Tell us this isn’t true.” And he said, “It is true.” Now that source is Al O’Donnell, who is the nuclear weapons engineer who armed, wired, and fired 186 nuclear weapons. So if you want to talk about someone, you’re the first person I’ve told that on the record, but it’s kind of about time.
Because if the President of the United States says they’re legal, they’re legal. Executive Order 12333. It says, we don’t assassinate, but it can be overwritten by another order that’s straight out of Rizzo’s mouth. Also, really important to keep in mind is that the military operates under what’s called Title 50. It’s part of the National Security Code that gives rules and etc. How you must behave in a war theater. Well, the CIA is under no such rules. It operates under what’s called Title 50. And it’s interesting to me as reporter, because before I wrote the book and reported openly about Title 50, it was not really discussed. And now you even see operators themselves on podcasts talking about Title 50, which is kind of great because it’s like the cat’s out of the bag, guys. That’s what it’s called. And that’s how it works. It means what we say goes.
So the SEALs operate under Title 10. So they had to get what I call sheep-dip because that’s what the insiders call it. And that is a term that comes from interestingly Area 51, the U-2 pilots who were Air Force pilots, they needed to be sheep dipped over to the CIA so they could do things that defied the law. So you can see how these all entwine and you become more and more informed, and you go, “Aha.” Right? So that’s how Title 50 worked. So the night of that mission, it was a CIA mission because the CIA is allowed to go into Pakistan and kill someone, and the military can.
He would show me these PowerPoints that were just fantastic. Late in his life, he was constantly being asked to go up to Fort Bragg and lecture to the young soldiers, and everybody loved him. And he would drive all night to get there, and he would create these PowerPoints, and then he would show me the PowerPoints, all unclassified. But at one point, when Hugo Chavez was in power, Billy Waugh was kind of asked, that’s how it works, of if you had to think about doing something, what would it look like? Let’s just say hypothetically. So he took me through this PowerPoint that never happened, whereby he and a group of operators, agency operators were going to HALO jump in to the palace and grab Chavez and probably kill him because he wouldn’t allow himself to be captured. And by the way, HALO jumping, for those listeners who don’t know, high altitude, low opening.
So you jump out of an aircraft and you go down like a pencil until you’re really low to the deck, like a thousand feet. You pull your parachute cord, and that way you’re not picked up on radar and you’re also not traceable when you get to the ground because it’s so fast. Billy Waugh took the second HALO jump in history into a war theater in Laos during the Vietnam War. So he’s like this famous HALO jumper. So he and the team were going to go in grab Chavez, and he said to me a very interesting thing that was kind of a one moment in time where I saw a different side of Billy Waugh where he said, “I’m so glad we didn’t do that, even though I really wanted to at the time, because can you imagine that country’s problems, where it is now? Can you imagine how we would have been blamed?” And it was an interesting rare moment for Billy Waugh to comment on the bigger picture that you’re asking me about. I think pretty much the operators I know they just stick to the mission.
But I once asked Billy when I was trying to get the question and he wouldn’t answer it, and I said, so there’s another person in my book named Rick Proto, who’s also a legendary agency guy, and so he’s like 20 years younger than Billy. And I said, “Billy, if you and Rick had to kill each other, who would win?” I was trying to imagine this hypothetical, how would that work? Who would win? And I posed the question to each of them, and of course each of them said me, then I went back to them and Billy said, “Let me tell you how I would win.” And he said, ” I’d cheat. I’d show up before the duel.”
He gets word that the SEAL who has been tracking Mughniyeh to get photographs of him, to give the photographs to Mossad and CIA so they can do a joint operation to kill him, which they did with a car bomb in Damascus. That’s the end of the story. But how we got there was, the CIA needed confirmation. You can’t kill the wrong person. So the SEAL panicked according to Billy Waugh and was just like, “I’m out of here. This is too dangerous and I do not want to wind up in a Saudi prison.” So who do you send in, Billy Waugh? He shows up, he’s there for 24 hours. He knows where Mughniyeh lives from the SEAL. He positions himself in a cafe across the street which is run by Sudanese men. And of course Waugh speaks some Sudanese because he operated in Sudan. And he’s shooting the shit with him by his own words. He had the most foul mouth that was just absolutely delightful to listen to.
And then in between him and Mughniyeh’s house is a dumpster. And Billy Waugh being Billy Waugh, who will go to any lengths to do the job, decides to conduct reconnaissance from inside the dumpster. And that is where he is when he takes the picture of Imad Mughniyeh living so comfortably in Saudi. That Mughniyeh according to Billy, came out of his apartment building with dry cleaner plastic bag hangers over his shoulder. That’s how comfortable he lived there. It was his neighborhood. Click, click, click, Billy Waugh takes the photographs, runs them to the CIA headquarters in Saudi at the embassy. Oh my God, it’s Mughniyeh. Get the hell out of here. He gets to the airport, he leaves. Those photographs get sent to the agency, and then they do the operation with Mossad and Mughniyeh is dead. Now the truth about that being a co CIA mission was not reported for many years after the fact. Mossad took credit as the CIA often likes to just give other people credit. They just want the job done.
And also great opportunity for me to say, I’m often standing on the shoulders of journalists before me who did an incredible job digging into something and being able to report what they knew. Often the books are 10, 20, 30 years old, and so much more has come to light since.
But Russian assassins were able to poison Khokhlov with polonium. What happens to him is insane and it’s a miracle he didn’t die, but he doesn’t. And then he defects to the West and he writes these books and he tells lots of incredible secrets about the Russian assassination programs and their poison labs and they’re really interesting. So to answer that question, I mean to my eye of course, I don’t know, but it certainly looks like Russia is acting in the same vein that it has always acted, taking care of dissidents that go against Mother Russia.
And what has happened in the five years since this question was first on everybody’s minds about NSA surveillance is that the civilian sector companies have essentially done all the defense department’s biometric surveillance job for them by all of us sharing our facially recognizable images on Instagram and Facebook and everywhere else, X, by sharing information, by writing up narratives about ourselves. This information has become part of the database. Five years ago when I was reporting First Platoon, I was interviewing the police chief of El Segundo, which is like on the outskirts of LA. It’s right near the airport. And why it’s important is because it’s like defense contractor haven. So they have massive surveillance. And Chief Whalen, when I posed this question to him, he said to me, “Annie, let me show you something.” And he had Clearwater AI, the recognition software on his phone. And this was still when it was like quasi not supposed to, you have that for law enforcement. And he said, “I want you to go down the block and I want you to just turn the corner and come back toward me.” Which I did. And he just didn’t even hold up his phone. He just looked at his hand and his phone was on me. And he went back down and it was like the tiniest movement. And when I came back to him, he went like this and he showed me, there I was. Everything about me. Facts and figures and all images. And he knew who I was before I even got to him. So is that a good thing or a bad thing? I mean, we could have another three hour conversation about that alone.
So what it’s doing is it’s creating an ability for, if someone wants to know about you, if someone, let’s say in government, wants to know about Lex Fridman, they can find out everything about you. And then that gets used for tagging, tracking and ultimately. In the war theater it was called find, fix, finish. Well, what do you think the finish is in that statement?
And O’Donnell like so many others, was slated to invade mainland Japan, to his almost certain death. So somebody like that, it makes sense right from the get go why he would be pro nuclear weapons. It saved his own personal life and it saved everyone that he knew that he was fighting with. And it ended the war.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 2:13 – Nuclear war
- 6:57 – Launch procedure
- 12:36 – Deterrence
- 16:09 – Tactical nukes
- 25:35 – Nuclear submarines
- 28:35 – Nuclear missiles
- 35:46 – Nuclear football
- 44:53 – Missile interceptor system
- 49:10 – North Korea
- 55:46 – Nuclear war scenarios
- 1:04:38 – Warmongers
- 1:09:06 – President’s cognitive ability
- 1:15:19 – Refusing orders
- 1:23:17 – Russia and Putin
- 1:28:23 – Cyberattack
- 1:29:45 – Ground zero of nuclear war
- 1:34:24 – Surviving nuclear war
- 1:38:42 – Nuclear winter
- 1:49:05 – Alien civilizations
- 1:54:40 – Extrasensory perception
- 2:08:25 – Area 51
- 2:12:23 – UFOs and aliens
- 2:22:51 – Roswell incident
- 2:29:30 – CIA assassinations
- 2:48:23 – Navalny
- 2:50:48 – KGB
- 2:57:24 – Hitler and the atomic bomb
- 3:01:27 – War and human nature
- 3:04:53 – Hope
Introduction
Annie Jacobsen
The United States has 1,770 nuclear weapons deployed, meaning those weapons could launch in as little as 60 seconds and up to a couple of minutes. Some of them on the bombers might take an hour or so. Russia has 1,674 deployed nuclear weapons. Same scenario. Their weapons systems are on par with ours. That’s not to mention the 12,500 nuclear weapons amongst the nine nuclear armed nations. The sucking up into the nuclear stem, 300 mile an hour winds, you’re talking about people miles out getting sucked up into that stem. When you see the mushroom cloud, Lex, that would be people 30, 40 mile wide mushroom cloud blocking out the sun, and that speaks nothing of the radiation poisoning that follows.
The United States has 1,770 nuclear weapons deployed, meaning those weapons could launch in as little as 60 seconds and up to a couple of minutes. Some of them on the bombers might take an hour or so. Russia has 1,674 deployed nuclear weapons. Same scenario. Their weapons systems are on par with ours. That’s not to mention the 12,500 nuclear weapons amongst the nine nuclear armed nations. The sucking up into the nuclear stem, 300 mile an hour winds, you’re talking about people miles out getting sucked up into that stem. When you see the mushroom cloud, Lex, that would be people 30, 40 mile wide mushroom cloud blocking out the sun, and that speaks nothing of the radiation poisoning that follows.
In addition to the Launch on Warning concept, there’s this other insane concept called Sole Presidential Authority. And you might think, in a democracy that’s impossible, right? You can’t just start a war. Well, you can just start a nuclear war if you are the commander in chief, the President of the United States. In fact, you’re the only one who can do that. We are one misunderstanding, one miscalculation away from nuclear Armageddon. No matter how nuclear war starts, it ends with everyone dead.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Annie Jacobsen, an investigative journalist, Pulitzer price finalist and author of several amazing books on war, weapons, government secrecy, and national security, including the books titled Area 51, Operation Paperclip, The Pentagon’s Brain, Phenomena, Surprise, Kill, Vanish, and her new book, Nuclear War. This is a Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Annie Jacobsen.
The following is a conversation with Annie Jacobsen, an investigative journalist, Pulitzer price finalist and author of several amazing books on war, weapons, government secrecy, and national security, including the books titled Area 51, Operation Paperclip, The Pentagon’s Brain, Phenomena, Surprise, Kill, Vanish, and her new book, Nuclear War. This is a Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Annie Jacobsen.
Nuclear war
Let’s start with an immensely dark topic, nuclear war. How many people would a nuclear war between the United States and Russia kill?
Annie Jacobsen
I’m coming back at you with a very dark answer and a very big number. And that number is 5 billion people.
I’m coming back at you with a very dark answer and a very big number. And that number is 5 billion people.
Lex Fridman
You go second by second, minute by minute, hour by hour what would happen if the nuclear war started? There’s a lot of angles from which I would love to talk to you about this. First, how would the deaths happen in the short term and the long term?
You go second by second, minute by minute, hour by hour what would happen if the nuclear war started? There’s a lot of angles from which I would love to talk to you about this. First, how would the deaths happen in the short term and the long term?
Annie Jacobsen
To start off, the reason I wrote the book is so that readers like you could see in appalling detail just how horrific nuclear war would be. And as you said, second by second, minute by minute. The book covers nuclear launch to nuclear winter. I purposely don’t get into the politics that lead up to that or the national security maneuvers or the posturing or any of that. I just want people to know nuclear war is insane. And every source I interviewed for this book, from Secretary of Defense, all retired, nuclear sub-force commander, STRATCOM commander, FEMA director, et cetera. On and on and on, nuclear weapons engineers. They all shared with me the common denominator that nuclear war is insane.
To start off, the reason I wrote the book is so that readers like you could see in appalling detail just how horrific nuclear war would be. And as you said, second by second, minute by minute. The book covers nuclear launch to nuclear winter. I purposely don’t get into the politics that lead up to that or the national security maneuvers or the posturing or any of that. I just want people to know nuclear war is insane. And every source I interviewed for this book, from Secretary of Defense, all retired, nuclear sub-force commander, STRATCOM commander, FEMA director, et cetera. On and on and on, nuclear weapons engineers. They all shared with me the common denominator that nuclear war is insane.
First millions, then tens of millions, then hundreds of millions of people will die in the first 72 minutes of a nuclear war. And then, comes nuclear winter where the billions happen from starvation. And so, the shock power of all of this is meant for each and every one of us to say, “Wait, what?” This actually exists behind the veil of national security. Most people do not think about nuclear war on a daily basis, and yet hundreds of thousands of people in the nuclear command and control are at the ready in the event it happens.
Lex Fridman
But it doesn’t take too many people to start one.
But it doesn’t take too many people to start one.
Annie Jacobsen
In the words of Richard Garwin, who was the nuclear weapons engineer who drew the plans for the Ivy Mike thermonuclear bomb, the first thermonuclear bomb ever exploded in 1952. Garwin shared with me his opinion that all it takes is one nihilistic madman with a nuclear arsenal to start a nuclear war. And that’s how I begin the scenario.
In the words of Richard Garwin, who was the nuclear weapons engineer who drew the plans for the Ivy Mike thermonuclear bomb, the first thermonuclear bomb ever exploded in 1952. Garwin shared with me his opinion that all it takes is one nihilistic madman with a nuclear arsenal to start a nuclear war. And that’s how I begin the scenario.
Lex Fridman
What are the different ways it could start? Literally, who presses a button and what does it take to press a button?
What are the different ways it could start? Literally, who presses a button and what does it take to press a button?
Annie Jacobsen
The way it starts is in space, meaning the US Defense Department has a early warning system, and the system in space is called SBIRS. It’s a constellation of satellites that is keeping an eye on all of America’s enemies so that the moment an ICBM launches, the satellite in space… And I’m talking about 1/10 of the way to the moon, that’s how powerful these satellites are in geo-sync. They see the hot rocket exhaust on the ICBM in a fraction of a second after it launches, a fraction of a second.
The way it starts is in space, meaning the US Defense Department has a early warning system, and the system in space is called SBIRS. It’s a constellation of satellites that is keeping an eye on all of America’s enemies so that the moment an ICBM launches, the satellite in space… And I’m talking about 1/10 of the way to the moon, that’s how powerful these satellites are in geo-sync. They see the hot rocket exhaust on the ICBM in a fraction of a second after it launches, a fraction of a second.
And so, there begins this horrifying policy called Launch on Warning, right? And that’s the US counterattack. Meaning the reason that the United States is so ferociously watching for a nuclear launch somewhere around the globe is so that the nuclear command and control system in the US can move into action to immediately make a counterstrike. Because we have that policy, Launch on Warning, which is exactly like it says. It means the United States will not wait to absorb a nuclear attack. It will launch nuclear weapons in response before the bomb actually hits.
Launch procedure
Lex Fridman
So the president, as part of the Launch on Warning policy, has six minutes… I guess can’t launch for six minutes, but at six minute mark from that first warning, the president can launch.
So the president, as part of the Launch on Warning policy, has six minutes… I guess can’t launch for six minutes, but at six minute mark from that first warning, the president can launch.
Annie Jacobsen
And that was one of the most remarkable details to really nail down for this book when I was reporting this book, and talking to Secretary of Defenses, for example, who are the people who advise the president on this matter, right? You say to yourself, ” Wait a minute. How could that possibly be?” So, let’s unpack that. So, in addition to the Launch on Warning concept, there’s this other insane concept called Sole Presidential Authority. And you might think, in a democracy that’s impossible, right? You can’t just start a war. Well, you can just start a nuclear war if you are the commander in chief, the President of the United States. In fact, you’re the only one who can do that. And we can get into later why that exists. I was able to get the origin story of that concept from Los Alamos, they declassified it for the book.
And that was one of the most remarkable details to really nail down for this book when I was reporting this book, and talking to Secretary of Defenses, for example, who are the people who advise the president on this matter, right? You say to yourself, ” Wait a minute. How could that possibly be?” So, let’s unpack that. So, in addition to the Launch on Warning concept, there’s this other insane concept called Sole Presidential Authority. And you might think, in a democracy that’s impossible, right? You can’t just start a war. Well, you can just start a nuclear war if you are the commander in chief, the President of the United States. In fact, you’re the only one who can do that. And we can get into later why that exists. I was able to get the origin story of that concept from Los Alamos, they declassified it for the book.
But the idea behind that is that nuclear war will unfold so fast only one person can be in charge. The president. He asks permission of no one. Not the Secretary of Defense, not the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, not the US Congress. So, built into that is this extraordinary speed you talk about, the six-minute window. And some people say, “That’s ridiculous. How do we know that six minute window?” Well, here’s the best hitting the nail on the head statement I can give you, which is in President Reagan’s memoirs, he refers to the six-minute window and he says… He calls it irrational, which it is. He says, “How can anyone make a decision to launch nuclear weapons based on a blip on a radar scope.” His words. “To unleash Armageddon.” And yet, that is the reality behind nuclear war.
Lex Fridman
Just imagine sitting there, one person, because a president is a human being, sitting there, just got the warning that Russia launched. You have six minutes. I meditate on my immortality every day. And here, you would be sitting and meditating, contemplating not just your own mortality, but the mortality of all the people you know, loved ones. Just imagining. What would be going through my head is all the people I know and love personally, and knowing that there’ll be no more, most likely. And if they somehow survive, they will be suffering and will eventually die.
Just imagine sitting there, one person, because a president is a human being, sitting there, just got the warning that Russia launched. You have six minutes. I meditate on my immortality every day. And here, you would be sitting and meditating, contemplating not just your own mortality, but the mortality of all the people you know, loved ones. Just imagining. What would be going through my head is all the people I know and love personally, and knowing that there’ll be no more, most likely. And if they somehow survive, they will be suffering and will eventually die.
I guess the question that kept coming up is how do we stop this? Is it inevitable that it’s going to be escalated to a full-on nuclear war that destroys everything? And it seems like it will be. It’s inevitable. In the position of the President, it’s almost inevitable that they have to respond.
Annie Jacobsen
I mean, one of the things I found shocking was how little apparently most presidents know about the responsibility that literally lays at their feet. You may think through this six-minute window, I may think through this six-minute window. But what I learned, for example, former Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta was really helpful in explaining this to me because before he was SecDef, he served as the director of the CIA. And before that, he was the White House Chief of Staff. And so, he has seen these different roles that have been so close to the President. But he explained to me that when he was the White House Chief of Staff for President Clinton, he noticed how President Clinton didn’t want to ever really deal with the nuclear issue because he had so many other issues to deal with.
I mean, one of the things I found shocking was how little apparently most presidents know about the responsibility that literally lays at their feet. You may think through this six-minute window, I may think through this six-minute window. But what I learned, for example, former Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta was really helpful in explaining this to me because before he was SecDef, he served as the director of the CIA. And before that, he was the White House Chief of Staff. And so, he has seen these different roles that have been so close to the President. But he explained to me that when he was the White House Chief of Staff for President Clinton, he noticed how President Clinton didn’t want to ever really deal with the nuclear issue because he had so many other issues to deal with.
And that only when Panetta became Secretary of Defense, he told me, did he really realize the weight of all of this, because he knew he would be the person that the president would turn to were he to be notified of a nuclear attack. And by the way, the Launch on Warning, it’s the ballistic missile seen from outer space by the satellite. And then, there also must be a second confirmation from a ground radar system. But in that process, which is just a couple minutes, everyone is getting ready to notify the president. And one of the first people that gets notified by NORAD or by STRATCOM or by NRO, these different parties that all see the early warning data, one of the first people that’s notified is the Secretary of Defense as well as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, because those two together are going to brief the president about, “Sir, you have six minutes to decide.”
Deterrence
And that’s where you realize the immediacy of all of this is so counter to imagining the scenario. And again, all the presidents come into office, I have learned, understanding the idea of deterrence, this idea that we have these massive arsenals of nuclear weapons pointed at one another ready to launch so that we never have nuclear war. But what we’re talking about now is, what if we did? What if we did? And what you’ve raised is this really spooky, eerie subtext of the world right now because many of the nuclear armed nations are in direct conflict with other nations. And for the first time in decades, nuclear threats are actually coming out of the mouths of leaders. This is shocking.
Lex Fridman
So deterrence, the polite, implied assumption is that nobody will launch. And if they did, we would launch back and everybody would be dead. But that assumption falls apart completely, the whole philosophy of it falls apart once the first launch happens, then you have six minutes to decide, “Wait a minute. Are we going to hit back and kill everybody on earth? Or do we turn the other cheek in the most horrific way possible?”
So deterrence, the polite, implied assumption is that nobody will launch. And if they did, we would launch back and everybody would be dead. But that assumption falls apart completely, the whole philosophy of it falls apart once the first launch happens, then you have six minutes to decide, “Wait a minute. Are we going to hit back and kill everybody on earth? Or do we turn the other cheek in the most horrific way possible?”
Annie Jacobsen
Well, when nuclear war starts, there’s no battle for New York or battle for Moscow. It’s just literally… It was called in the Cold War, push button warfare. But in essence, that is what it is. Let’s get some numbers on the table if you don’t mind, right? Because when you’re saying like, “Wait a minute. We’re just hoping that it holds.” Right? Let’s just talk about Russia and the US, the arsenals that are literally pointed at one another right now. The United States has 1,770 nuclear weapons deployed, meaning those weapons could launch in as little as 60 seconds and up to a couple minutes. Some of them on the bombers might take an hour or so. Russia has 1,674 deployed nuclear weapons. Same scenario. Their weapons systems are on par with ours. That’s not to mention the 12,500 nuclear weapons amongst the nine nuclear armed nations.
Well, when nuclear war starts, there’s no battle for New York or battle for Moscow. It’s just literally… It was called in the Cold War, push button warfare. But in essence, that is what it is. Let’s get some numbers on the table if you don’t mind, right? Because when you’re saying like, “Wait a minute. We’re just hoping that it holds.” Right? Let’s just talk about Russia and the US, the arsenals that are literally pointed at one another right now. The United States has 1,770 nuclear weapons deployed, meaning those weapons could launch in as little as 60 seconds and up to a couple minutes. Some of them on the bombers might take an hour or so. Russia has 1,674 deployed nuclear weapons. Same scenario. Their weapons systems are on par with ours. That’s not to mention the 12,500 nuclear weapons amongst the nine nuclear armed nations.
But when you think about those kinds of arsenals of just between the United States and Russia, and you realize everything can be launched in seconds and minutes, then you realize the madness of mad, this idea that no one would launch because it would assure everyone’s destruction. Yes. But what if someone did? And in my interviews with scores of top tier national security advisors, people who advise the president, people who are responsible for these decisions if they had to be made, every single one of them said it could happen. They didn’t say this would never happen. And so, the idea is worth thinking about because I believe that it pulls back the veil on a fundamental security that if someone were to use a tactical nuclear weapon, “Well, it’s just an escalation.” It’s far more than that.
Tactical nukes
Lex Fridman
So to you, the use of a tactical nuclear weapon, maybe you can draw the line between a tactical and a strategic nuclear weapon. That could be a catalyst. That’s a very difficult thing to walk back from.
So to you, the use of a tactical nuclear weapon, maybe you can draw the line between a tactical and a strategic nuclear weapon. That could be a catalyst. That’s a very difficult thing to walk back from.
Annie Jacobsen
Oh, my God. Almost certainly. And again, every person in the national security environment will agree with that, certainly on the American side. Strategic weapons, those are big weapons systems. America has a nuclear triad. We have our ICBMs, which are the silo-based missiles that have a nuclear warhead in the nose cone, and they can get from one continent to the other in roughly 30 minutes. Then we have our bombers, B-52s and B-2s, that are nuclear capable. Those take travel time to get to another continent. Those can also be recalled. The ICBMs cannot be recalled or redirected once launched.
Oh, my God. Almost certainly. And again, every person in the national security environment will agree with that, certainly on the American side. Strategic weapons, those are big weapons systems. America has a nuclear triad. We have our ICBMs, which are the silo-based missiles that have a nuclear warhead in the nose cone, and they can get from one continent to the other in roughly 30 minutes. Then we have our bombers, B-52s and B-2s, that are nuclear capable. Those take travel time to get to another continent. Those can also be recalled. The ICBMs cannot be recalled or redirected once launched.
Lex Fridman
That one is a particularly terrifying one. So land launched missiles, rockets with a warhead, can’t be recalled.
That one is a particularly terrifying one. So land launched missiles, rockets with a warhead, can’t be recalled.
Annie Jacobsen
Cannot be recalled or redirected. And speaking of how little the presidents generally know, as we were talking a moment ago, President Reagan, in 1983, gave a press conference where he misstated that submarine launched ballistic missiles could be recalled. They cannot be recalled. Here’s the guy in charge of the arsenal if it has to get let loose, and he doesn’t even know that they cannot be recalled. So, this is the kind of misinformation and disinformation. UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, recently said when he was talking about the conflicts rising around the world, he said, “We are one misunderstanding, one miscalculation away from nuclear Armageddon.”
Cannot be recalled or redirected. And speaking of how little the presidents generally know, as we were talking a moment ago, President Reagan, in 1983, gave a press conference where he misstated that submarine launched ballistic missiles could be recalled. They cannot be recalled. Here’s the guy in charge of the arsenal if it has to get let loose, and he doesn’t even know that they cannot be recalled. So, this is the kind of misinformation and disinformation. UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, recently said when he was talking about the conflicts rising around the world, he said, “We are one misunderstanding, one miscalculation away from nuclear Armageddon.”
Lex Fridman
So, just to linger on the previous point of tactical nukes. You were describing strategic nukes, land launched bombers, submarine launched. What are tactical nukes?
So, just to linger on the previous point of tactical nukes. You were describing strategic nukes, land launched bombers, submarine launched. What are tactical nukes?
Annie Jacobsen
That’s the triad, right? And we have the triad, and Russia has the triad. Tactical nuclear weapons are smaller warheads that were designed to be used in battle. And that is what Russia is sort of threatening to use right now. That is this idea, that you would make a decision on the battlefield in an operational environment to use a tactical nuclear weapon. You’re just upping the ante. But the problem is that all treaties are based on this idea of no nuclear use, right? You cannot cross that line. And so, what would happen if the line is crossed is so devastating to even consider. I think that the conversation is well worth having among everyone that is in a power of position. As the UN Secretary General said, “This is madness.” Right? “This is madness. We must come back from the brink. We are at the brink.”
That’s the triad, right? And we have the triad, and Russia has the triad. Tactical nuclear weapons are smaller warheads that were designed to be used in battle. And that is what Russia is sort of threatening to use right now. That is this idea, that you would make a decision on the battlefield in an operational environment to use a tactical nuclear weapon. You’re just upping the ante. But the problem is that all treaties are based on this idea of no nuclear use, right? You cannot cross that line. And so, what would happen if the line is crossed is so devastating to even consider. I think that the conversation is well worth having among everyone that is in a power of position. As the UN Secretary General said, “This is madness.” Right? “This is madness. We must come back from the brink. We are at the brink.”
Lex Fridman
Can we talk about some other numbers? You mentioned the number of warheads. Land launched, how long does it take to travel across the ocean from the United States to Russia, from Russia to the United States, from China to the United States, approximately how long?
Can we talk about some other numbers? You mentioned the number of warheads. Land launched, how long does it take to travel across the ocean from the United States to Russia, from Russia to the United States, from China to the United States, approximately how long?
Annie Jacobsen
When I was writing an earlier book on DARPA, the Pentagon Science Agency, I went to a library down in San Diego, called the Geisel Library, to look at Herb York’s papers. Herb York was the first chief scientist for the Pentagon for DARPA, then called ARPA. And I had been trying to get the number from the various agencies that be to answer your… What is the exact number and how do we know it? And does it change? And as technology advances, does that number reduce? All these kinds of questions. And no one will answer that question on an official level. And so, much to my surprise, I found the answer in Herb York’s dusty archive of papers. And this is information that was jealously guarded. I mean, it’s not necessarily classified, but it certainly wasn’t out there. And I felt like, “Wow. Herb York left these behind for someone like me to find.”
When I was writing an earlier book on DARPA, the Pentagon Science Agency, I went to a library down in San Diego, called the Geisel Library, to look at Herb York’s papers. Herb York was the first chief scientist for the Pentagon for DARPA, then called ARPA. And I had been trying to get the number from the various agencies that be to answer your… What is the exact number and how do we know it? And does it change? And as technology advances, does that number reduce? All these kinds of questions. And no one will answer that question on an official level. And so, much to my surprise, I found the answer in Herb York’s dusty archive of papers. And this is information that was jealously guarded. I mean, it’s not necessarily classified, but it certainly wasn’t out there. And I felt like, “Wow. Herb York left these behind for someone like me to find.”
He wanted to know the answer to your question as the guy in charge of it all. So, he hired this group of scientists who then, and still are in many ways, the supermen scientists of the Pentagon, and they’re called the JASON Scientists. Many conspiracies about them abound. I interviewed their founder and have interviewed many of them. But they whittled the number down to seconds specifically for Herb York. And it goes like, because this is where my jaw dropped. And I went, “Wow.” So, 26 minutes and 40 seconds from a launch pad in the Soviet Union to the East Coast. And it happens in three phases. Very simple. And interesting to remember, because then suddenly all of this makes more sense. Boost phase, mid-course phase and then terminal phase, okay?
Boost phase, five minutes. That’s when the rocket launches. So, you just imagine a rocket going off the launch pad and the fire beneath it. Again, that’s why the satellites can see it. Now it’s becoming visual, now it makes sense to me. Five minutes. And that’s where the rocket can be tracked. And then imagine learning, “Wait a minute. After five minutes, the rocket can no longer be seen from space. The satellite can only see the hot rocket exhaust.” Then the missile enters its mid-course phase, 20 minutes. And that’s the ballistic part of it, where it’s flying up at between 500 and 700 miles above the earth and moving very fast and with the earth until it gets very close to its target. And the last 100 seconds are terminal phase. It’s where the warhead re-enters the atmosphere and detonates.
26 minutes and 40 seconds. Now in my scenario, I open with North Korea launching a one megaton nuclear warhead at Washington DC. That’s the nihilistic madman maneuver. That’s the bolt out of the blue attack that everyone in Washington will tell you they’re afraid of. And North Korea has a little bit different geography. And so, I had MIT Professor Emeritus Ted Postol do the math, 33 minutes from a launch pad in Pyongyang to the East coast of the United States. You get the idea, it’s about 30 minutes.
But hopefully now that allows readers to suddenly see all this as a real… You almost see it as poetry, as terrible as that may sound. You can visualize it and suddenly it makes sense. And I think the sense-making part of it is really what I’m after in this book. Because I want people to understand, on the one hand, it’s incredibly simple, it’s just the people that have made it so complicated.
Lex Fridman
But it’s one of those things that can change all of world history in a matter of minutes. We just don’t, as a human civilization, have experience with that. But it doesn’t mean it’ll never happen. It can happen just like that.
But it’s one of those things that can change all of world history in a matter of minutes. We just don’t, as a human civilization, have experience with that. But it doesn’t mean it’ll never happen. It can happen just like that.
Annie Jacobsen
I mean, I think what you’re after, and I couldn’t agree more with, is why is this fundamentally annihilating system, a system of mass genocide? As John Rubel in the book refers to it. Why is it still exist? We’ve had 75 years since there’ve been two superpowers with the nuclear bomb. So, that threat has been there for 75 years, and we have managed to stay alive. One of the reasons why so many of the sources in the book agreed to talk to me, people who had not previously gone on the record about all of this, was because they are now approaching the end of their lives. They spent their lives dedicated to preventing nuclear World War III. And they’ll be the first people to tell you we’re closer to this as a reality than ever before. And so, the only bright side of any of this is that the answer lies most definitely in communication.
I mean, I think what you’re after, and I couldn’t agree more with, is why is this fundamentally annihilating system, a system of mass genocide? As John Rubel in the book refers to it. Why is it still exist? We’ve had 75 years since there’ve been two superpowers with the nuclear bomb. So, that threat has been there for 75 years, and we have managed to stay alive. One of the reasons why so many of the sources in the book agreed to talk to me, people who had not previously gone on the record about all of this, was because they are now approaching the end of their lives. They spent their lives dedicated to preventing nuclear World War III. And they’ll be the first people to tell you we’re closer to this as a reality than ever before. And so, the only bright side of any of this is that the answer lies most definitely in communication.
Nuclear submarines
Lex Fridman
So, there’s a million other questions here. I think the details are fascinating and important to understand. So one, you also say nuclear submarines… You mentioned about 30 minutes, 26, 33 minutes. But with nuclear submarines, that number can be much, much lower. So, how long does it take for a warhead missile to reach the east coast of the United States from a submarine?
So, there’s a million other questions here. I think the details are fascinating and important to understand. So one, you also say nuclear submarines… You mentioned about 30 minutes, 26, 33 minutes. But with nuclear submarines, that number can be much, much lower. So, how long does it take for a warhead missile to reach the east coast of the United States from a submarine?
Annie Jacobsen
Just when you thought it was really bad, and then you realize about the submarines. I mean, the submarines are what are called second strike capacity. Submarines were described to me this way, they are as dangerous to civilization… And let me say a nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered submarine is as dangerous to civilization as an asteroid. They’re unstoppable. They are unlocatable, the former Chief of the Nuclear Submarine Forces, Admiral Michael Connor, told me it’s easier to find a grapefruit-sized object in space than a submarine under the sea.
Just when you thought it was really bad, and then you realize about the submarines. I mean, the submarines are what are called second strike capacity. Submarines were described to me this way, they are as dangerous to civilization… And let me say a nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered submarine is as dangerous to civilization as an asteroid. They’re unstoppable. They are unlocatable, the former Chief of the Nuclear Submarine Forces, Admiral Michael Connor, told me it’s easier to find a grapefruit-sized object in space than a submarine under the sea.
These things are like hell machines, and they’re moving around throughout the oceans, ours, Russia’s, China’s, maybe North Korea’s constantly. And we now know they’re sneaking up to the east and west coast of the United States within a couple hundred miles. How do we know that? Why do we know that? Well, I found a document inside of a budget that the defense department was going to Congress for more money recently and showed maps of precisely where these submarines… How close they were getting to the eastern seaboard.
Lex Fridman
Wat, wait, wait. So, nuclear subs are getting within 200 miles?
Wat, wait, wait. So, nuclear subs are getting within 200 miles?
Annie Jacobsen
Couple hundred miles, yes. They weren’t precise on the number, but when you look at the map-
Couple hundred miles, yes. They weren’t precise on the number, but when you look at the map-
Lex Fridman
Couple hundred.
Couple hundred.
Annie Jacobsen
Yeah. And that’s when you’re talking about under 10 minutes from launch to strike.
Yeah. And that’s when you’re talking about under 10 minutes from launch to strike.
Lex Fridman
Undetectable.
Undetectable.
Annie Jacobsen
And they’re undetectable. The map making is done after the fact because of a lot of underwater surveillance systems that we have. But in real time, you cannot find a nuclear submarine. And just the way a submarine launches goes 150 feet below the surface to launch its ballistic missile. I mean, it comes out of the missile tube with enough thrust that the thrusters, the boot, they ignite outside the water and then they move into boost. And so, the technology involved is just stunning and shocking. And again, trillions of dollars spent so that we never have a nuclear war. But my God, what if we did.
And they’re undetectable. The map making is done after the fact because of a lot of underwater surveillance systems that we have. But in real time, you cannot find a nuclear submarine. And just the way a submarine launches goes 150 feet below the surface to launch its ballistic missile. I mean, it comes out of the missile tube with enough thrust that the thrusters, the boot, they ignite outside the water and then they move into boost. And so, the technology involved is just stunning and shocking. And again, trillions of dollars spent so that we never have a nuclear war. But my God, what if we did.
Nuclear missiles
Lex Fridman
As you write, they’re called the handmaidens of the apocalypse. What a terrifying label. I mean, one of the things you also write about, so for the land launched ones, they’re presumably underground. So the silos, how long does it take to go from pressing the button to them emerging from underground for launch? And is that part detectable or it’s only the heat?
As you write, they’re called the handmaidens of the apocalypse. What a terrifying label. I mean, one of the things you also write about, so for the land launched ones, they’re presumably underground. So the silos, how long does it take to go from pressing the button to them emerging from underground for launch? And is that part detectable or it’s only the heat?
Annie Jacobsen
What’s interesting about the silos, America has 400 silos, right? We’ve had more. But we have 400, and they’re underground, and they’re called Minutemen after the Revolutionary War heroes. But the joke in Washington is they’re not called Minutemen for nothing, because they can launch in one minute. The president orders the launch of the ICBMs, ICBM stands for Intercontinental Ballistic Missile. He orders the launch, and they launch 60 seconds later. And then, they take 30 some odd minutes to get to where they’re going.
What’s interesting about the silos, America has 400 silos, right? We’ve had more. But we have 400, and they’re underground, and they’re called Minutemen after the Revolutionary War heroes. But the joke in Washington is they’re not called Minutemen for nothing, because they can launch in one minute. The president orders the launch of the ICBMs, ICBM stands for Intercontinental Ballistic Missile. He orders the launch, and they launch 60 seconds later. And then, they take 30 some odd minutes to get to where they’re going.
The submarines take about 14 or 15 minutes from the launch command to actually launching. And that has to do, I surmise, with the location of the submarine, its depth. Some of these things are so highly classified and other details are shockingly available if you look deep enough, or if you ask enough questions, and you can go from one document to the next, to the next and really find these answers.
Lex Fridman
Not to ask top secret questions, but to what degree do you think the Russians know the locations of the silos in the US and vice versa?
Not to ask top secret questions, but to what degree do you think the Russians know the locations of the silos in the US and vice versa?
Annie Jacobsen
Lex, you and I can find the location of every silo right now.
Lex, you and I can find the location of every silo right now.
Lex Fridman
Oh, no.
Oh, no.
Annie Jacobsen
They’re all there. And before they were there on Google, they were there in Maps because we’re a democracy and we make these things known. Now, what’s tricky is that Russia and North Korea rely upon what are called road mobile launchers. Russia has a lot of underground silos. All of the scenario takes you through these different facilities that really do exist, and they’re all sourced with how many weapons they have and their launch procedures and whatnot. But in addition to having underground silos, they have road mobile launchers, and that means you just have one of these giant ICBMs on a 22 axle truck that can move stealthily around the country so that it can’t be targeted by the US Defense Department.
They’re all there. And before they were there on Google, they were there in Maps because we’re a democracy and we make these things known. Now, what’s tricky is that Russia and North Korea rely upon what are called road mobile launchers. Russia has a lot of underground silos. All of the scenario takes you through these different facilities that really do exist, and they’re all sourced with how many weapons they have and their launch procedures and whatnot. But in addition to having underground silos, they have road mobile launchers, and that means you just have one of these giant ICBMs on a 22 axle truck that can move stealthily around the country so that it can’t be targeted by the US Defense Department.
We don’t have those in America, because presumably the average American isn’t going to go for the ICBM road mobile launcher driving down the street in your town or city, which is why the Defense Department will justify we need the second strike capacity capability, the submarines, because… The wonky stuff that is worth looking into, if you really dig the book and are like, “Wait a minute.” It’s all footnoted where you can learn more about how these systems have changed over time. And why, more than anything, it’s very difficult to get out of this catch-22 conundrum that we need nuclear weapons to keep us safe. That is the real enigma. Because the other guys have them, right? And the other guys have-
Annie Jacobsen
The other guys have them. And the other guys have more sinister ways of using them, or at least that’s what the nomenclature out of the Pentagon will always be when anyone tries to say, “We just need to really think about full disarmament.”
The other guys have them. And the other guys have more sinister ways of using them, or at least that’s what the nomenclature out of the Pentagon will always be when anyone tries to say, “We just need to really think about full disarmament.”
Lex Fridman
You’ve written about intelligence agencies. How good are the intelligence agencies on this? How much does CIA know about the Russian launch sites, and capabilities, and command and control procedures, and all of this and vice versa?
You’ve written about intelligence agencies. How good are the intelligence agencies on this? How much does CIA know about the Russian launch sites, and capabilities, and command and control procedures, and all of this and vice versa?
Annie Jacobsen
I mean, all of this, because it’s decades old, is really well known. If you go to the Federation of American Scientists, they have a team led by a guy called Hans Kristensen who runs what’s called the Nuclear Notebook. And he and his team every year are keeping track of this number of warheads on these number of weapon systems. And because of the treaties, the different signatories to the treaty all report these numbers. And of course, the different intelligence community, people are keeping track of what’s being revealed honestly and reported with transparency and what is being hidden. The real issue is the new systems that Russia is working on right now, and that will lead us… We are moving into an era whereby the threat of actually having new weapon systems that are nuclear capable is very real because of the escalating tensions around the world. And that’s where the CIA would guess is doing most of its work right now.
I mean, all of this, because it’s decades old, is really well known. If you go to the Federation of American Scientists, they have a team led by a guy called Hans Kristensen who runs what’s called the Nuclear Notebook. And he and his team every year are keeping track of this number of warheads on these number of weapon systems. And because of the treaties, the different signatories to the treaty all report these numbers. And of course, the different intelligence community, people are keeping track of what’s being revealed honestly and reported with transparency and what is being hidden. The real issue is the new systems that Russia is working on right now, and that will lead us… We are moving into an era whereby the threat of actually having new weapon systems that are nuclear capable is very real because of the escalating tensions around the world. And that’s where the CIA would guess is doing most of its work right now.
Lex Fridman
So most of your research is looking at the older versions of the system, and presumably there’s potentially secret development of new ones, hopefully not-
So most of your research is looking at the older versions of the system, and presumably there’s potentially secret development of new ones, hopefully not-
Annie Jacobsen
Which violates treaties.
Which violates treaties.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Annie Jacobsen
So yes, that is where the intelligence agencies… But at a point, it’s overkill, literally and figuratively. People are up in arms about these hypersonic weapons. Well, we have a hypersonic weapons program, Falcon. Google Blackswift. This is Lockheed’s doing. DARPA exists to create the vast weapon systems of the future. That is its job. It has been doing that since its creation in 1957. I would never believe that we aren’t ahead of everyone. Call me over- informed or naive, one or the other. That would be my position because DARPA works from the chicken or the egg scenario. That once you learn about something, once you learn Russia’s created this Typhoon submarine, which may or may not be viable, it’s too late if you don’t already have one.
So yes, that is where the intelligence agencies… But at a point, it’s overkill, literally and figuratively. People are up in arms about these hypersonic weapons. Well, we have a hypersonic weapons program, Falcon. Google Blackswift. This is Lockheed’s doing. DARPA exists to create the vast weapon systems of the future. That is its job. It has been doing that since its creation in 1957. I would never believe that we aren’t ahead of everyone. Call me over- informed or naive, one or the other. That would be my position because DARPA works from the chicken or the egg scenario. That once you learn about something, once you learn Russia’s created this Typhoon submarine, which may or may not be viable, it’s too late if you don’t already have one.
Lex Fridman
We’ll probably talk about DARPA a little bit. One of the things that makes me sad about Lockheed, many things make me sad about Lockheed, but one of the things is because it’s very top secret, you can’t show off all the incredible engineering going on there. The other thing that’s more philosophical, DARPA also, is that war seems to stimulate most of our, not most, but a large percent of our exciting innovation in engineering. But that’s also the pragmatic fact of life on earth is that the risk of annihilation is a great motivator for innovation, for engineering, and so on. But yes, I would not discount the United States in its ability to build the weapons of the future, nuclear included. Again, terrifying. Can you tell me about the nuclear football, as it’s called?
We’ll probably talk about DARPA a little bit. One of the things that makes me sad about Lockheed, many things make me sad about Lockheed, but one of the things is because it’s very top secret, you can’t show off all the incredible engineering going on there. The other thing that’s more philosophical, DARPA also, is that war seems to stimulate most of our, not most, but a large percent of our exciting innovation in engineering. But that’s also the pragmatic fact of life on earth is that the risk of annihilation is a great motivator for innovation, for engineering, and so on. But yes, I would not discount the United States in its ability to build the weapons of the future, nuclear included. Again, terrifying. Can you tell me about the nuclear football, as it’s called?
Nuclear football
Annie Jacobsen
I think Americans are familiar with the football, at least anyone who follows national security concepts because it’s a satchel. It’s a leather satchel that is always with a military aide in Secret Service nomenclature. That’s the mil aide. And he’s trailing around the president 24/7, 365 days a year, and also the vice president, by the way, with the ability to launch nuclear war in that six-minute window all the time. That is also called the football, and it’s always with the president. To report this part of the book, I interviewed a lot of people in the Secret Service that are with the president and talk about this. And the Director of the Secret Service, a guy called Lou Merletti, told me a story that I just really found fascinating. He was also in charge of the president’s detail, President Clinton this was, before he was director of the Secret Service.
I think Americans are familiar with the football, at least anyone who follows national security concepts because it’s a satchel. It’s a leather satchel that is always with a military aide in Secret Service nomenclature. That’s the mil aide. And he’s trailing around the president 24/7, 365 days a year, and also the vice president, by the way, with the ability to launch nuclear war in that six-minute window all the time. That is also called the football, and it’s always with the president. To report this part of the book, I interviewed a lot of people in the Secret Service that are with the president and talk about this. And the Director of the Secret Service, a guy called Lou Merletti, told me a story that I just really found fascinating. He was also in charge of the president’s detail, President Clinton this was, before he was director of the Secret Service.
And he told me the story about how, he said, “The football is with the president at all times, period.” They were traveling to Syria, and Clinton was meeting with President Assad. And they got into an elevator, Clinton and the Secret Service team, and one of Assad’s guys was like, “No.” About the mil aide. And Lou said it was like a standoff because there was no way they were not going to have the president with his football in an elevator. And it sums up. For me anyways, you realize what goes into every single one of these decisions. You realize the massive system of systems behind every item you might just see in passing and glancing on the news as you see the mil aide carrying that satchel. Well, what’s in that satchel? I really dug into that to report this book.
Lex Fridman
What is in that satchel?
What is in that satchel?
Annie Jacobsen
Okay. So well, okay. First of all, people always say, “It’s incredibly classified.” I mean, people talk about UFOs. “It’s incredibly…” I mean, come on, guys. That is nothing burger. You want to know what’s really classified? What’s in that football? What’s in that satchel? But the PEAD, Presidential Emergency Action Directives, those have never been leaked. No one knows what they are. What we do know from one of the mil aides who spoke on the record, a guy called Buzz Patterson, he describes the President’s orders. So if a nuclear war has begun, if the president has been told, “There are nuclear missiles, one or more, coming at the United States, you have to launch in a counterattack. The red clock is ticking. You have to get the blue impact clock ticking.” He needs to look at this list to decide what targets to strike and what weapon systems to use. And that is what is on, according to Buzz Patterson, a piece of laminated plastic. He described it like a Denny’s menu. And from that menu, the president chooses targets and chooses weapon systems.
Okay. So well, okay. First of all, people always say, “It’s incredibly classified.” I mean, people talk about UFOs. “It’s incredibly…” I mean, come on, guys. That is nothing burger. You want to know what’s really classified? What’s in that football? What’s in that satchel? But the PEAD, Presidential Emergency Action Directives, those have never been leaked. No one knows what they are. What we do know from one of the mil aides who spoke on the record, a guy called Buzz Patterson, he describes the President’s orders. So if a nuclear war has begun, if the president has been told, “There are nuclear missiles, one or more, coming at the United States, you have to launch in a counterattack. The red clock is ticking. You have to get the blue impact clock ticking.” He needs to look at this list to decide what targets to strike and what weapon systems to use. And that is what is on, according to Buzz Patterson, a piece of laminated plastic. He described it like a Denny’s menu. And from that menu, the president chooses targets and chooses weapon systems.
Lex Fridman
And it’s probably super old school, like all top secret systems are, because they have to be tested over and over and over and over and over, probably-
And it’s probably super old school, like all top secret systems are, because they have to be tested over and over and over and over and over, probably-
Annie Jacobsen
Yes, and it’s non-digital.
Yes, and it’s non-digital.
Lex Fridman
Non-digital. It might literally be a Denny’s menu from hell.
Non-digital. It might literally be a Denny’s menu from hell.
Annie Jacobsen
Right. And meanwhile, I learned this only in reporting the book. There is a identical black book inside the STRATCOM bunker in Nebraska. So three command bunkers are involved when nuclear war begins. There’s the bunker beneath the Pentagon, which is called the National Military Command Center. Then there is the bunker beneath Cheyenne Mountain, which everyone has or many people have heard of because it’s been made famous in movies. That is a very real bunker. And then there is a third bunker, which people are not so familiar with, which is the bunker beneath Strategic Command in Nebraska.
Right. And meanwhile, I learned this only in reporting the book. There is a identical black book inside the STRATCOM bunker in Nebraska. So three command bunkers are involved when nuclear war begins. There’s the bunker beneath the Pentagon, which is called the National Military Command Center. Then there is the bunker beneath Cheyenne Mountain, which everyone has or many people have heard of because it’s been made famous in movies. That is a very real bunker. And then there is a third bunker, which people are not so familiar with, which is the bunker beneath Strategic Command in Nebraska.
And so it’s described to me this way, the Pentagon bunker is the beating heart, the Cheyenne Mountain bunker is the brains, and the STRATCOM bunker is the muscle. The STRATCOM commander will receive word from the president, “Launch orders.” And then directs the 150,000 people beneath him what to do from the bunker beneath STRATCOM. He gets the orders, then he has to run out of the building and jump onto what’s called the doomsday plane. We’ll get into that in a minute. Let me just finish the… I mean, but again-
Lex Fridman
No, this is good. All right.
No, this is good. All right.
Annie Jacobsen
… these are the details. These are the systematic sequential details that happen in seconds and minutes. And reporting them, I never cease to be amazed by what a system it is. A follows B. It’s just numerical, right?
… these are the details. These are the systematic sequential details that happen in seconds and minutes. And reporting them, I never cease to be amazed by what a system it is. A follows B. It’s just numerical, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but as we discuss this procedure, each individual person that follows that procedure might lose the big picture of the whole thing. I mean, especially when you realize what is happening that almost out of fear, you just follow the steps.
Yeah, but as we discuss this procedure, each individual person that follows that procedure might lose the big picture of the whole thing. I mean, especially when you realize what is happening that almost out of fear, you just follow the steps.
Annie Jacobsen
Yep. Or okay, so imagine this. Imagine being the president, and you got that six minute. You’re looking at your list of strike options. You’re being briefed by your chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and your SecDef. And this other really spooky detail. In the STRATCOM bunker, in addition to the nuclear strike advisor who can answer very specific questions, if the president’s like, “Wait a minute, why are we striking that and not that?” There’s also a weather officer. And this is the kind of human detail that kept me up at night because that weather officer is in charge of explaining to the president really fast, how many people are going to die and how many people are going to die in minutes, weeks, months, and years from radiation fallout.
Yep. Or okay, so imagine this. Imagine being the president, and you got that six minute. You’re looking at your list of strike options. You’re being briefed by your chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and your SecDef. And this other really spooky detail. In the STRATCOM bunker, in addition to the nuclear strike advisor who can answer very specific questions, if the president’s like, “Wait a minute, why are we striking that and not that?” There’s also a weather officer. And this is the kind of human detail that kept me up at night because that weather officer is in charge of explaining to the president really fast, how many people are going to die and how many people are going to die in minutes, weeks, months, and years from radiation fallout.
Lex Fridman
Because a lot of that has to do with the weather system.
Because a lot of that has to do with the weather system.
Annie Jacobsen
Yes. Yes. And so these kinds of the humanness balanced out with the mechanization of it all, it’s just really grotesque.
Yes. Yes. And so these kinds of the humanness balanced out with the mechanization of it all, it’s just really grotesque.
Lex Fridman
So the doomsday plane from STRATCOM?
So the doomsday plane from STRATCOM?
Annie Jacobsen
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
What’s that? Where’s it going? What’s on it?
What’s that? Where’s it going? What’s on it?
Annie Jacobsen
Right.
Right.
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 00:43:05].
[inaudible 00:43:05].
Annie Jacobsen
Okay, ready?
Okay, ready?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Annie Jacobsen
It’s going to fly in circles. That’s where it’s going. It’s flying in circles around the United States of America so that nuclear weapons can be launched from the air after the ground systems are taken out by the incoming ICBMs or the incoming submarine-launched ballistic missiles. This has been in play since the ’50s. These are the contingency plans for when nuclear war happens. So again, going back to this absurd paradox, nuclear war will never happen. Mutual assured destruction, that is why deterrence will hold. Well, I found a talk that the deputy director of STRATCOM gave to a very close-knit group where he said, “Yes, deterrence will hold. But if it fails, everything unravels.” And think about that word unravels. And the unraveling is the doomsday plane launches. The STRATCOM commander jumps in. He’s in that plane, he’s flying around the United States, and he’s making decisions because the Pentagon’s been taken out. At 9/11, by the way, Bush was in the doomsday plane.
It’s going to fly in circles. That’s where it’s going. It’s flying in circles around the United States of America so that nuclear weapons can be launched from the air after the ground systems are taken out by the incoming ICBMs or the incoming submarine-launched ballistic missiles. This has been in play since the ’50s. These are the contingency plans for when nuclear war happens. So again, going back to this absurd paradox, nuclear war will never happen. Mutual assured destruction, that is why deterrence will hold. Well, I found a talk that the deputy director of STRATCOM gave to a very close-knit group where he said, “Yes, deterrence will hold. But if it fails, everything unravels.” And think about that word unravels. And the unraveling is the doomsday plane launches. The STRATCOM commander jumps in. He’s in that plane, he’s flying around the United States, and he’s making decisions because the Pentagon’s been taken out. At 9/11, by the way, Bush was in the doomsday plane.
Lex Fridman
And Bush had to make decisions quickly, but not as quickly as he would’ve needed to have done if there’s a nuclear launch.
And Bush had to make decisions quickly, but not as quickly as he would’ve needed to have done if there’s a nuclear launch.
Annie Jacobsen
I mean-
I mean-
Lex Fridman
Six minutes.
Six minutes.
Annie Jacobsen
… it basically happens in three acts. There’s the first 24 minutes, the next 24 minutes, and the last 24 minutes. And that is the reality of nuclear weapons.
… it basically happens in three acts. There’s the first 24 minutes, the next 24 minutes, and the last 24 minutes. And that is the reality of nuclear weapons.
Missile interceptor system
Lex Fridman
What is the interceptor capabilities of the United States? How many nuclear missiles can be stopped?
What is the interceptor capabilities of the United States? How many nuclear missiles can be stopped?
Annie Jacobsen
I was at a dinner party with a very informed person, somebody who really should have known this, and this is what I was considering writing and reporting this book. And he said to me, “Oh Annie, that would never happen because of our powerful interceptor system.” Okay. Well, he’s wrong. Let me tell you about our powerful interceptor system. First of all, we have 44 interceptor missiles total, period, full stop. Let me repeat, 44. Earlier we were talking about Russia’s 1,670 deployed nuclear weapons. How are those 44 interceptor missiles going to work? And they also have a success rate of around 50%. So they work 50% of the time.
I was at a dinner party with a very informed person, somebody who really should have known this, and this is what I was considering writing and reporting this book. And he said to me, “Oh Annie, that would never happen because of our powerful interceptor system.” Okay. Well, he’s wrong. Let me tell you about our powerful interceptor system. First of all, we have 44 interceptor missiles total, period, full stop. Let me repeat, 44. Earlier we were talking about Russia’s 1,670 deployed nuclear weapons. How are those 44 interceptor missiles going to work? And they also have a success rate of around 50%. So they work 50% of the time.
There are 40 of them in Alaska, and there are four of them at Vandenberg Air Force Base in Santa Barbara. And they are responsible at about nine minutes into the scenario. After the ICBM has finished that five-minute boost phase we talked about, now it’s in mid-course phase, and the ground radar systems have identified, yes, this is an incoming ICBM. And now the interceptor missiles have to launch. It’s essentially shooting a missile with a missile. Inside the interceptor, which is just a big giant rocket, in its nose cone, it has what’s called the aptly named Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle. There’s no explosives in that thing. It’s literally just going to take out the warhead ideally with force. So one of them is going mach 20. I mean, the speeds at which these two moving objects hurtling through space are going is astonishing. And the fact that interception is even possible is really remarkable, but it’s only possible 50% of the time.
Lex Fridman
Is it possible that we only know about 44, but there could be a lot more?
Is it possible that we only know about 44, but there could be a lot more?
Annie Jacobsen
No, impossible. That I would be willing to bet.
No, impossible. That I would be willing to bet.
Lex Fridman
And how well-tested are these interceptors?
And how well-tested are these interceptors?
Annie Jacobsen
Well, that’s where we get the success rate that’s around 50% because of the tests. And actually the interceptor program is, are you ready for this? It’s on strategic pause right now, meaning the interceptor missiles are there, but developing them and making them more effective is on strategic pause because they can’t be made more effective. People have these fantasies that we have a system like the Iron Dome. And they see this in current events, and they’re like, “Oh, our interceptors would do that.” It’s just simply not true.
Well, that’s where we get the success rate that’s around 50% because of the tests. And actually the interceptor program is, are you ready for this? It’s on strategic pause right now, meaning the interceptor missiles are there, but developing them and making them more effective is on strategic pause because they can’t be made more effective. People have these fantasies that we have a system like the Iron Dome. And they see this in current events, and they’re like, “Oh, our interceptors would do that.” It’s just simply not true.
Lex Fridman
Why can’t an Iron Dome-like system be constructed for nuclear warheads?
Why can’t an Iron Dome-like system be constructed for nuclear warheads?
Annie Jacobsen
We have systems I write about called the THAAD system, which is ground-based, and then the Aegis system, which is on vessels. And these are great at shooting down some rockets, but they can only shoot them one at a time. You cannot shoot the mother load as it’s coming in. Those are the smaller systems, the tactical nuclear weapons. And by the way, our THAAD systems are all deployed overseas, and our Aegis systems are all out at sea. And again, reporting that, I was like, “Wait, what? You have to really hunker down. Are we sure about this?” People really don’t want to believe this is an actual fact. After 9/11, Congress considered putting Aegis missiles and maybe even THAAD systems along the West Coast of the United States to specifically deal with the threats against nuclear-armed North Korea. But it hasn’t done so yet. And again, you have to ask yourself, “Wait a minute. This is insanity.” One nuclear weapon gets by any of these systems, and it’s full-out nuclear warfare. So that’s not the solution. More nuclear weapons is not the solution.
We have systems I write about called the THAAD system, which is ground-based, and then the Aegis system, which is on vessels. And these are great at shooting down some rockets, but they can only shoot them one at a time. You cannot shoot the mother load as it’s coming in. Those are the smaller systems, the tactical nuclear weapons. And by the way, our THAAD systems are all deployed overseas, and our Aegis systems are all out at sea. And again, reporting that, I was like, “Wait, what? You have to really hunker down. Are we sure about this?” People really don’t want to believe this is an actual fact. After 9/11, Congress considered putting Aegis missiles and maybe even THAAD systems along the West Coast of the United States to specifically deal with the threats against nuclear-armed North Korea. But it hasn’t done so yet. And again, you have to ask yourself, “Wait a minute. This is insanity.” One nuclear weapon gets by any of these systems, and it’s full-out nuclear warfare. So that’s not the solution. More nuclear weapons is not the solution.
North Korea
Lex Fridman
I’m looking for a hopeful thing here about North Korea. How many deployed nuclear warheads does North Korea have? So does the current system, as we described it, the interceptors and so on, have a hope against the North Korean attack? The one that you mentioned people are worried about.
I’m looking for a hopeful thing here about North Korea. How many deployed nuclear warheads does North Korea have? So does the current system, as we described it, the interceptors and so on, have a hope against the North Korean attack? The one that you mentioned people are worried about.
Annie Jacobsen
So North Korea has 50, let’s say 50 nuclear weapons right now. Some NGOs put it at more than 100. It’s impossible to know because North Korea’s nuclear weapons program has no transparency. They’re the only nuclear-armed nation that doesn’t announce when they do a ballistic missile test. Everyone else does. No one wants to start a nuclear war by accident. So if Russia is going to launch an ICBM, they tell us. If we’re going to launch one, and I’m talking test runs here, with a dummy warhead, we tell them. Not North Korea. That’s a fact. So we’re constantly up against the fear of North Korea. In the scenario, I have the incoming North Korean one-megaton weapon coming in, and the interceptor system tries to shoot it down. So there’s not enough time. And this, by the way, I ran through by all generals from the Pentagon who run these scenarios for NORAD and confirmed all of this as fact. This is the situation.
So North Korea has 50, let’s say 50 nuclear weapons right now. Some NGOs put it at more than 100. It’s impossible to know because North Korea’s nuclear weapons program has no transparency. They’re the only nuclear-armed nation that doesn’t announce when they do a ballistic missile test. Everyone else does. No one wants to start a nuclear war by accident. So if Russia is going to launch an ICBM, they tell us. If we’re going to launch one, and I’m talking test runs here, with a dummy warhead, we tell them. Not North Korea. That’s a fact. So we’re constantly up against the fear of North Korea. In the scenario, I have the incoming North Korean one-megaton weapon coming in, and the interceptor system tries to shoot it down. So there’s not enough time. And this, by the way, I ran through by all generals from the Pentagon who run these scenarios for NORAD and confirmed all of this as fact. This is the situation.
So in the scenario, I have the nuclear ICBM coming in. The interceptor missiles try to shoot down the warhead. The capability is not like what’s called shoot and look. There’s not enough time to go, “And we’re going to try to get it. We missed it. Okay, let’s go for another one.” So you have to go… So in my scenario, we fire off four, which is about what I was told, one to four, because you’re worried about the next one that’s going to come in. You’re going to use up 10% of your missile force, of your interceptor force on one, and all four miss. And that’s totally plausible.
Lex Fridman
Right. How likely are mistakes, accidents, false alarms taken as real, all this kind of stuff in this picture? So we’ve assumed the detection works correctly. How likely is it possible, anywhere? You described this long chain of events that can happen. How possible is it just to make a mistake, a stupid human mistake along the way?
Right. How likely are mistakes, accidents, false alarms taken as real, all this kind of stuff in this picture? So we’ve assumed the detection works correctly. How likely is it possible, anywhere? You described this long chain of events that can happen. How possible is it just to make a mistake, a stupid human mistake along the way?
Annie Jacobsen
There have been at least six known absolute, oh my God, close calls, how, thank God this happened, type scenarios. One was described to me with an actual personal participant, former Secretary of Defense, Bill Perry, and he described what happened to him in 1979. He was not yet Secretary of Defense. He was the Deputy Director of the Research and Engineering, which is a big job at the Pentagon. And the night watch fell on him essentially. And he gets this call in the middle of the night. He’s told that Russia has launched not just ICBMs, but submarine-launched ballistic missiles are coming at the United States. And he is about to notify the president that the six-minute window has to begin when he learns it was a mistake.
There have been at least six known absolute, oh my God, close calls, how, thank God this happened, type scenarios. One was described to me with an actual personal participant, former Secretary of Defense, Bill Perry, and he described what happened to him in 1979. He was not yet Secretary of Defense. He was the Deputy Director of the Research and Engineering, which is a big job at the Pentagon. And the night watch fell on him essentially. And he gets this call in the middle of the night. He’s told that Russia has launched not just ICBMs, but submarine-launched ballistic missiles are coming at the United States. And he is about to notify the president that the six-minute window has to begin when he learns it was a mistake.
The mistake was that there was a training tape with a nuclear war scenario. We haven’t even begun to talk about the nuclear war scenarios that the Pentagon runs. An actual VHS training tape had been incorrectly inserted into a system at the Pentagon. And so this nuclear launch showed up at that bunker beneath the Pentagon and at the bunker beneath STRATCOM because they’re connected, as being real. And then it was like, oh, whoops. It’s actually a simulation test tape. And Perry described to me what that was like, the pause in his spirit and his mind and his heart when he realized, “I’m about to have to tell the president that he needs to launch nuclear weapons.” And he learned just in the nick of time that it was an error. And that’s one of five examples.
Lex Fridman
Can you speak to maybe is there any more color to the feelings he was feeling? What’s your sense? And given all the experts you’ve talked to, what can be said about the seconds that one feels once finding out that a launch has happened, even if that information is false information?
Can you speak to maybe is there any more color to the feelings he was feeling? What’s your sense? And given all the experts you’ve talked to, what can be said about the seconds that one feels once finding out that a launch has happened, even if that information is false information?
Annie Jacobsen
For me personally, that’s the only firsthand story that I ever heard because it’s so rare and it’s so unique. And most people in the national security system, at least in the past, have been loath to talk about any of this. It’s the sacred oath. It’s taboo. It’s taboo to go against the system of systems that is making sure nuclear war never happens. Bill Perry was one of the first people who did this. And a lot of it, I believe, at least in my lengthy conversations with him, we had a lot of Zoom calls over COVID when I began reporting this.
For me personally, that’s the only firsthand story that I ever heard because it’s so rare and it’s so unique. And most people in the national security system, at least in the past, have been loath to talk about any of this. It’s the sacred oath. It’s taboo. It’s taboo to go against the system of systems that is making sure nuclear war never happens. Bill Perry was one of the first people who did this. And a lot of it, I believe, at least in my lengthy conversations with him, we had a lot of Zoom calls over COVID when I began reporting this.
And he had a lot to do with me feeling like I could write this book from a human point of view and not just from the mechanized systems. Because, and I only lightly touch upon this because it’s such a fast sweeping scenario, but Perry, for example, spent his whole life dedicated to building weapons of war only later in life to realize this is madness. And he shared with me that it was that idea about one’s grandchildren inheriting these nuclear arsenals and the lack of wisdom that comes with their origin stories. When you’re involved in it in the ground up, apparently it has perhaps you’re a different kind of steward of these systems than if you just inherit them, and they are pages in a manual.
Nuclear war scenarios
Lex Fridman
People forget. You mentioned the nuclear war scenarios that the Pentagon runs. I’d love to… What do you know about those?
People forget. You mentioned the nuclear war scenarios that the Pentagon runs. I’d love to… What do you know about those?
Annie Jacobsen
I mean, again, they are very classified. I mean, it was interesting coming across levels of classification I didn’t even know existed. ECI, for example, is exceptionally controlled information. But the Pentagon nuclear war gaming scenarios, they’re almost all still classified. One of them was declassified recently, if you can call it that. I show an image of it in the book, and it’s just basically almost entirely redacted. And then there’ll be a date, or it’ll say, “Phase one.” And that one was called Proud Prophet. But what was incredible about the declassification process of that is it allowed a couple of people who were there to talk about it, and that’s why we have that information.
I mean, again, they are very classified. I mean, it was interesting coming across levels of classification I didn’t even know existed. ECI, for example, is exceptionally controlled information. But the Pentagon nuclear war gaming scenarios, they’re almost all still classified. One of them was declassified recently, if you can call it that. I show an image of it in the book, and it’s just basically almost entirely redacted. And then there’ll be a date, or it’ll say, “Phase one.” And that one was called Proud Prophet. But what was incredible about the declassification process of that is it allowed a couple of people who were there to talk about it, and that’s why we have that information.
And I write about Proud Prophet in the book because it was super significant in many ways. One, it was happening right… In 1983, it was an insane moment in nuclear arsenals. There were 60,000 nuclear weapons. Right now there’s 12,500. So we’ve come a long way, baby, in terms of disarmament. But there were 60,000. And by the way, that was not the ultimate high. The ultimate high was 70,000. This is insane. And Ronald Reagan was president, and he orders this war game called Proud Prophet, and everyone that mattered was involved. They were running the war game scenarios.
And what we learned from his declassification is that no matter how nuclear war starts, there was a bunch of different scenarios, with NATO involved, without NATO, all different scenarios. No matter how nuclear war starts, it ends in Armageddon. It ends with everyone dead. I mean, this is shocking when you think about that coupled with the idea that all that has been done in the 40 some odd years since is, okay, let’s just really lean in even harder to this theoretical phenomena of deterrence. Because that’s all it is, it’s just a statement, Lex. Deterrence will hold. Okay. Well, what if it doesn’t? Well, we know from Proud Prophet what happens if it doesn’t.
Lex Fridman
So almost always, so there’s no mechanisms in the human mind and the human soul that stops it in the governments that we’ve created. The procedure escalates always.
So almost always, so there’s no mechanisms in the human mind and the human soul that stops it in the governments that we’ve created. The procedure escalates always.
Annie Jacobsen
I mean, here’s a crazy nomenclature, jargon thing for you. Ready? Escalate to deescalate. That’s what comes out of it. Think about what I just said. Escalate to deescalate. So someone strikes you with a nuclear weapon, you’re going to escalate it. General Hyten recently said he was STRATCOM commander. He was saber-rattling with North Korea during COVID, and he said, “They need to know if they launch one nuclear weapon, we launch one. If they launch two, we launch two.” But it’s actually more than that. They launch one, we launch 80. That’s called escalate to deescalate. Pound the you know what out of them to get them to stop.
I mean, here’s a crazy nomenclature, jargon thing for you. Ready? Escalate to deescalate. That’s what comes out of it. Think about what I just said. Escalate to deescalate. So someone strikes you with a nuclear weapon, you’re going to escalate it. General Hyten recently said he was STRATCOM commander. He was saber-rattling with North Korea during COVID, and he said, “They need to know if they launch one nuclear weapon, we launch one. If they launch two, we launch two.” But it’s actually more than that. They launch one, we launch 80. That’s called escalate to deescalate. Pound the you know what out of them to get them to stop.
Lex Fridman
But to make a case for that, there is a reason to the madness because you want to threaten this gigantic response. But when it comes to it, the seconds before, there is still a probability that you’ll pull back.
But to make a case for that, there is a reason to the madness because you want to threaten this gigantic response. But when it comes to it, the seconds before, there is still a probability that you’ll pull back.
Annie Jacobsen
Which brings us to the most terrifying facts that I learned in all of that, and that has to do with errors. Not errors of like we spoke about a minute ago with a simulation test tape. I’m talking about if one madman, one nihilistic madman were to launch a nuclear weapon as I write in this scenario, and we needed to escalate to deescalate. We needed to send nuclear weapons at, let’s say North Korea as I do in my scenario.
Which brings us to the most terrifying facts that I learned in all of that, and that has to do with errors. Not errors of like we spoke about a minute ago with a simulation test tape. I’m talking about if one madman, one nihilistic madman were to launch a nuclear weapon as I write in this scenario, and we needed to escalate to deescalate. We needed to send nuclear weapons at, let’s say North Korea as I do in my scenario.
Well, what is completely unknown to 98% of the planet is that not only do the Russians have a very flawed satellite system so that they cannot interpret what is happening properly, but there is an absolutely existential flaw in the system, which Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta confirmed with me, which is that our ICBMs do not have enough range. If we launch a counterattack against, say, North Korea, our ICBMs must fly over Russia. They must fly over Russia. So imagine saying, “Oh, no, no. These 82 warheads that are going to actually strike the Northern Korean peninsula are not coming for you, Russia.” Our adversary right now that we’re saber-rattling with. “Just trust us.” And that is where nuclear war unfolds into Armageddon. And that hole in national security is shocking. And as Panetta told me, no one wants to discuss it.
Lex Fridman
And if one nuclear weapon does reach its target, I presume communication breaks down completely, or there’s a high risk of breakdown of communication.
And if one nuclear weapon does reach its target, I presume communication breaks down completely, or there’s a high risk of breakdown of communication.
Annie Jacobsen
Well, let’s back up. We are both presumptuous to assume that communication could even happen prior to, and let me give you a very specific example. During the Ukraine war, if perhaps you remember, I think it was in November of 2022. News reports erroneously stated that a Russian rocket, a Russian missile had hit Poland, a NATO country. It turned out to be a mistake, but for several hours, this was actually the information that was all over the news, breaking news. 36 hours later, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, gave a press conference and talked about this and admitted that he could not reach his Russian counterpart during those 36 hours. He could not reach him. How are you going to not have an absolute Armageddon-like furor with nuclear weapons in the air if people can’t get on the phone during a ground war?
Well, let’s back up. We are both presumptuous to assume that communication could even happen prior to, and let me give you a very specific example. During the Ukraine war, if perhaps you remember, I think it was in November of 2022. News reports erroneously stated that a Russian rocket, a Russian missile had hit Poland, a NATO country. It turned out to be a mistake, but for several hours, this was actually the information that was all over the news, breaking news. 36 hours later, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, gave a press conference and talked about this and admitted that he could not reach his Russian counterpart during those 36 hours. He could not reach him. How are you going to not have an absolute Armageddon-like furor with nuclear weapons in the air if people can’t get on the phone during a ground war?
Lex Fridman
I’d like to believe that there’s people in major nations that don’t give a damn about the bullshit of politics and can always just pick up the phone. Very close to the top, but not at the very top, and just cut through the bullshit of it in situations like this.
I’d like to believe that there’s people in major nations that don’t give a damn about the bullshit of politics and can always just pick up the phone. Very close to the top, but not at the very top, and just cut through the bullshit of it in situations like this.
Annie Jacobsen
I hope that’s true. I doubt it is, and let me tell you why. Most, and neither you nor I are political, from what I gather. So I just write about POTUS, President of the United States. You have no idea what my politics are because they shouldn’t matter. No one should be for nuclear war, or no one should be for national insecurity. Yes, you want to have a strong nation. But once you get into politics, then you’re talking about sycophants. And the more a political leader becomes divisive, becomes polemic, the more his platform is predicated on hating the other side, either within his own country or with alleged enemy nations. The more you surround yourself, as we see in the current day with sycophants, with people who will tell you not only what they think you want-
I hope that’s true. I doubt it is, and let me tell you why. Most, and neither you nor I are political, from what I gather. So I just write about POTUS, President of the United States. You have no idea what my politics are because they shouldn’t matter. No one should be for nuclear war, or no one should be for national insecurity. Yes, you want to have a strong nation. But once you get into politics, then you’re talking about sycophants. And the more a political leader becomes divisive, becomes polemic, the more his platform is predicated on hating the other side, either within his own country or with alleged enemy nations. The more you surround yourself, as we see in the current day with sycophants, with people who will tell you not only what they think you want-
Annie Jacobsen
… defense with people who will tell you not only what they think you want to hear, but will help them to hold onto power. So you don’t have wise decision makers. Long gone are the days where we had presidents who had advisors on both sides of the aisle. That’s really important, because you want to have differing opinions. But as things become more viperous, both here in the United States and in nuclear armed nations, all bets are off at whether your advisors are going to give you good advice.
… defense with people who will tell you not only what they think you want to hear, but will help them to hold onto power. So you don’t have wise decision makers. Long gone are the days where we had presidents who had advisors on both sides of the aisle. That’s really important, because you want to have differing opinions. But as things become more viperous, both here in the United States and in nuclear armed nations, all bets are off at whether your advisors are going to give you good advice.
Warmongers
Lex Fridman
Who are the people around the President of the United States that give advice in this six minute window? How many of them just, maybe you could speak to the detail of that, but also to the spirit of the way they see the world. How many of them are warmongers? How many of them are kind of big picture, peace, humanity type of thinkers?
Who are the people around the President of the United States that give advice in this six minute window? How many of them just, maybe you could speak to the detail of that, but also to the spirit of the way they see the world. How many of them are warmongers? How many of them are kind of big picture, peace, humanity type of thinkers?
Annie Jacobsen
Well, again, we’re talking about that six minute window, so it’s not exactly like you can, let me put a pot of coffee on and really tell me what you think and we can strategize here, right? You have your SecDef and your chairman, maybe the vice chairman.
Well, again, we’re talking about that six minute window, so it’s not exactly like you can, let me put a pot of coffee on and really tell me what you think and we can strategize here, right? You have your SecDef and your chairman, maybe the vice chairman.
We haven’t even begun to talk about the fact that at the same time, these advisors also have a parallel concern, and that’s called continuity of government. So while they’re trying to advise on the nuclear counterstrike in response to the incoming nuclear missile, they have to be thinking, “How are we going to keep the government functioning when the missiles start hitting, when the bombs start going off?” And that is about getting yourself out of the Pentagon, let’s say. Getting yourself to one of these nuclear bunkers that I write about at length in the book.
So how much can you ask of a human, right? Because it comes down to a human. Secretary of Defense is a human. Imagine that job while trying to advise the president. And then there’s also a really interesting term which I learned about called jamming the president, which is often understood in Washington that the military advisors would, we don’t know if this is legit, we’ve never seen it put to the test, but jamming the president means the military advisors are going to push for a really aggressive counter attack immediately.
And again, you’re the president who’s not really been paying attention to this because he has many other things to deal with. Speed is not conducive to wisdom.
Lex Fridman
Can you speak to the jamming the president? So your sense is the advisors would by default be pushing for aggressive counter attack.
Can you speak to the jamming the president? So your sense is the advisors would by default be pushing for aggressive counter attack.
Annie Jacobsen
That is a term in sort of the national security nuclear command and control historical documentation that many of the people that you might call the more dovish type people are worried about, that the more hawkish people, the military advisors, are going to be jamming the president to make these decisions about which targets. Not if, but what.
That is a term in sort of the national security nuclear command and control historical documentation that many of the people that you might call the more dovish type people are worried about, that the more hawkish people, the military advisors, are going to be jamming the president to make these decisions about which targets. Not if, but what.
Lex Fridman
The argument will be about which targets, not about if.
The argument will be about which targets, not about if.
Annie Jacobsen
Yes. Yes.
Yes. Yes.
Lex Fridman
I hope that even the warmongers would at this moment… Because what underlies the idea of you wanting to go to war? It’s power. It’s like wanting to destroy the enemy and be the big kid on the block. But with nuclear war, it just feels like that falls apart. Do you think warmongers actually believe they can win a nuclear war?
I hope that even the warmongers would at this moment… Because what underlies the idea of you wanting to go to war? It’s power. It’s like wanting to destroy the enemy and be the big kid on the block. But with nuclear war, it just feels like that falls apart. Do you think warmongers actually believe they can win a nuclear war?
Annie Jacobsen
Well, you’ve raised a really important question that we looked at the historical record for that answer. Because astonishingly, all of this began, like when Russia first got the bomb in 1949, the powers that be, and I write about them in the book is in a setup for the moment of launch. It’s called How We Got Here. And you see, and I cite declassified documents from some of these early meetings where nuclear war plans were being laid out. And absolutely back in the 1950s the generals and the admirals that were running the nuclear command and control system believed that we could fight and win a nuclear war despite hundreds of millions of people dying. This was the prevailing thought. And only over time did the kind of concept come into play that no, we can never have a nuclear war. It’s the famous Gorbachev and Reagan joint statement. “A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.” But before that, many people believed that it could be won, and they were preparing for that.
Well, you’ve raised a really important question that we looked at the historical record for that answer. Because astonishingly, all of this began, like when Russia first got the bomb in 1949, the powers that be, and I write about them in the book is in a setup for the moment of launch. It’s called How We Got Here. And you see, and I cite declassified documents from some of these early meetings where nuclear war plans were being laid out. And absolutely back in the 1950s the generals and the admirals that were running the nuclear command and control system believed that we could fight and win a nuclear war despite hundreds of millions of people dying. This was the prevailing thought. And only over time did the kind of concept come into play that no, we can never have a nuclear war. It’s the famous Gorbachev and Reagan joint statement. “A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.” But before that, many people believed that it could be won, and they were preparing for that.
President’s cognitive ability
Lex Fridman
Not to be political and not to be ageist, but do cognitive abilities and all that kind of stuff come into play here? So if so much is riding on the president, is there tests that are conducted? Is there regular training procedures on the president that you’re aware of? Do you know?
Not to be political and not to be ageist, but do cognitive abilities and all that kind of stuff come into play here? So if so much is riding on the president, is there tests that are conducted? Is there regular training procedures on the president that you’re aware of? Do you know?
Annie Jacobsen
I don’t think that has anything to do with ageism. I think it’s an earnest question, a really powerful one. And if people were to ask that question of themselves or their sort of dinner party guests or their family around the dinner table guests, you might come to a real good conclusion about how bad our political system is and how bad our presidential candidates are. Because why on earth there would be two candidates, one of whom has cognitive problems and the other of whom has judgment problems? These are the two biggest issues with the nuclear launch, judgment and cognition. And so where’s the young-ish, thoughtful, forward looking, wise, dedicated civil servant running for president? I know that sounds fantastical, but I wish it weren’t.
I don’t think that has anything to do with ageism. I think it’s an earnest question, a really powerful one. And if people were to ask that question of themselves or their sort of dinner party guests or their family around the dinner table guests, you might come to a real good conclusion about how bad our political system is and how bad our presidential candidates are. Because why on earth there would be two candidates, one of whom has cognitive problems and the other of whom has judgment problems? These are the two biggest issues with the nuclear launch, judgment and cognition. And so where’s the young-ish, thoughtful, forward looking, wise, dedicated civil servant running for president? I know that sounds fantastical, but I wish it weren’t.
Lex Fridman
So that’s one of the things that you really think about when voting for president is this scenario that we’ve been describing, these six minutes. Imagine the man or woman sitting there six minutes waiting for the pot of coffee.
So that’s one of the things that you really think about when voting for president is this scenario that we’ve been describing, these six minutes. Imagine the man or woman sitting there six minutes waiting for the pot of coffee.
Annie Jacobsen
But I think about that issue with any war. I mean, prior to writing Nuclear War: A Scenario, I previously wrote six books on military and intelligence programs designed to prevent nuclear war. And I believe the president as commander in chief should be of the highest character possible. Because the programs, the wars that we have fought since World War II have all been… How many octogenarian sources have I interviewed? I’m talking about Nobel Laureates and weapons designers and spy pilots and engineers in general. They’ve all said to me with great pride, “We prevented World War III, nuclear World War III.”
But I think about that issue with any war. I mean, prior to writing Nuclear War: A Scenario, I previously wrote six books on military and intelligence programs designed to prevent nuclear war. And I believe the president as commander in chief should be of the highest character possible. Because the programs, the wars that we have fought since World War II have all been… How many octogenarian sources have I interviewed? I’m talking about Nobel Laureates and weapons designers and spy pilots and engineers in general. They’ve all said to me with great pride, “We prevented World War III, nuclear World War III.”
But that idea that the commander in chief and everyone within the national security apparatus should be making really good decisions about war. It’s the oldest cliche in the world that the wars are fought by the young kids. It’s not a cliche; it’s true. And so the character part about the president should be in play whether we’re thinking about nuclear war or any war, in my opinion.
Lex Fridman
Well, I agree with you first of all, but it feels like with nuclear war, one person becomes exponentially more important. With regular war, the decision to go to war or not, advisors start mattering more. There’s judgment issues. You could start to make arguments for more leeway in terms of what kind of people we elect. It seems like with nuclear war, there’s no leeway. It’s like one person can resist the jamming the president force, the warmongers all the calculation in considering what are the errors, the mistakes, the missiles flying over Russia, the full dynamics of the geopolitics going on in the world, consider all of humanity, the history of humanity, the future of humanity, all of it just loaded in to make a decision. Then it becomes much more important that your cognitive abilities are strong and your judgment abilities against powerful wise people just as a human being are strong. So I think that’s something to really, really consider when you vote for president.
Well, I agree with you first of all, but it feels like with nuclear war, one person becomes exponentially more important. With regular war, the decision to go to war or not, advisors start mattering more. There’s judgment issues. You could start to make arguments for more leeway in terms of what kind of people we elect. It seems like with nuclear war, there’s no leeway. It’s like one person can resist the jamming the president force, the warmongers all the calculation in considering what are the errors, the mistakes, the missiles flying over Russia, the full dynamics of the geopolitics going on in the world, consider all of humanity, the history of humanity, the future of humanity, all of it just loaded in to make a decision. Then it becomes much more important that your cognitive abilities are strong and your judgment abilities against powerful wise people just as a human being are strong. So I think that’s something to really, really consider when you vote for president.
But to which degree is it really on the president versus to the people advising?
Annie Jacobsen
Oh no, it’s on the president. The president has to make the call. And that six minute window happens so fast. I mean, the president is going to be being moved for part of that time. The Secret Service is going to be up against STRATCOM. STRATCOM saying, “We need the launch orders,” and the Secret Service is going to be saying, “We need to move the president.” So it’s not as much that he’s delegating the issues; it’s more like the issue is being postponed. Because there is only one issue, for the president to say, “These targets.” For him to choose from the Denny’s like menu, “Okay, this is what we’re going to go with.”
Oh no, it’s on the president. The president has to make the call. And that six minute window happens so fast. I mean, the president is going to be being moved for part of that time. The Secret Service is going to be up against STRATCOM. STRATCOM saying, “We need the launch orders,” and the Secret Service is going to be saying, “We need to move the president.” So it’s not as much that he’s delegating the issues; it’s more like the issue is being postponed. Because there is only one issue, for the president to say, “These targets.” For him to choose from the Denny’s like menu, “Okay, this is what we’re going to go with.”
And then this astonishing thing happens. The president takes out his wallet. He has a card in it that’s colloquially called the biscuit, and that card with the codes matches up an item in the briefcase in the football that then is received by an officer underneath the Pentagon in that bunker. It’s a call and response, Lex. It’s like alpha zeta, that’s it. And then back so that the individual in the bunker realizes they are getting the command from the president. And then that order is passed to STRATCOM. And STRATCOM, the commander of STRATCOM, and I interviewed a former commander of STRATCOM, commander of STRATCOM then follows orders, which is he delivers the launch orders to the nuclear triad, and what’s done is done.
Refusing orders
Lex Fridman
What would you do if you were the commander of STRATCOM in that situation? What would you do? Because I think my gut reaction right now, if you just throw me in there, I would refuse orders.
What would you do if you were the commander of STRATCOM in that situation? What would you do? Because I think my gut reaction right now, if you just throw me in there, I would refuse orders.
Annie Jacobsen
Okay, so good question. I asked that exact question to one of my very helpful sources on the book, Dr. Glen McDuff, who is at Los Alamos and who for a while was the classified… They have a museum that’s classified within the lab, and he was the historian in charge of it. He’s a nuclear weapons engineer. He worked on Star Wars during the Reagan era. And he does a lot having to do with the history of Los Alamos. By the way, because I’ve reported on nuclear weapons for 12 years now, and Oppenheimer movie had a very, to me, positive impact on Los Alamos’ transparency with people like me. They had a real willingness to share information. I think before perhaps they were on their heels feeling they needed to be on the defensive, but now they’re much more forthcoming. They were super helpful. I can tell you the origin story of the football, which they declassified for the book. But I asked this question to Dr. Glen McDuff in a different manner. I said, “Is there a chance that the STRATCOM commander would defy orders?” And he said, “Annie, you have a better chance winning Powerball.”
Okay, so good question. I asked that exact question to one of my very helpful sources on the book, Dr. Glen McDuff, who is at Los Alamos and who for a while was the classified… They have a museum that’s classified within the lab, and he was the historian in charge of it. He’s a nuclear weapons engineer. He worked on Star Wars during the Reagan era. And he does a lot having to do with the history of Los Alamos. By the way, because I’ve reported on nuclear weapons for 12 years now, and Oppenheimer movie had a very, to me, positive impact on Los Alamos’ transparency with people like me. They had a real willingness to share information. I think before perhaps they were on their heels feeling they needed to be on the defensive, but now they’re much more forthcoming. They were super helpful. I can tell you the origin story of the football, which they declassified for the book. But I asked this question to Dr. Glen McDuff in a different manner. I said, “Is there a chance that the STRATCOM commander would defy orders?” And he said, “Annie, you have a better chance winning Powerball.”
Lex Fridman
Why do you think? What’s his intuition behind that?
Why do you think? What’s his intuition behind that?
Annie Jacobsen
You don’t wind up as STRATCOM commander unless you are someone who follows orders. You follow orders.
You don’t wind up as STRATCOM commander unless you are someone who follows orders. You follow orders.
Lex Fridman
You don’t think there’s a deep humanity there? Because his intuition is about everything we know so far, but this situation has never happened in the history of earth.
You don’t think there’s a deep humanity there? Because his intuition is about everything we know so far, but this situation has never happened in the history of earth.
Annie Jacobsen
You’re raising a really tricky, interesting conundrum here. Because during COVID, when President Trump and the leader of North Korea were kind of locked in various relationships with one another, good, bad, threatening, non-threatening, friendly; just bananas, you might say, not presidential behavior. If you were someone watching C-span like I do, nerding out on what STRATCOM was actually saying about all this, you noticed that STRATCOM commanders were speaking out publicly to Congress more so than ever I had ever seen before. And this issue came up, would you defy presidential orders?
You’re raising a really tricky, interesting conundrum here. Because during COVID, when President Trump and the leader of North Korea were kind of locked in various relationships with one another, good, bad, threatening, non-threatening, friendly; just bananas, you might say, not presidential behavior. If you were someone watching C-span like I do, nerding out on what STRATCOM was actually saying about all this, you noticed that STRATCOM commanders were speaking out publicly to Congress more so than ever I had ever seen before. And this issue came up, would you defy presidential orders?
So the caveat I would say to McDuff’s answer of easier to win the Powerball is that if the commander of STRATCOM interpreted the president’s behavior to be unreliable, to be non-presidential, then dot dot dot. But now you’re into some really radical territory.
Lex Fridman
I mean, fundamentally, it feels like just looking at all the presidents of the United States in my lifetime, it feels like none of them are qualified for this six minutes. I could see as being the commander of STRATCOM being like, “This guy?” Basically respecting no president. I know you’re supposed to, commander in chief, but in this situation… I mean everybody, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden. If I was a commander of STRATCOM, I’d be like, “What does this guy know about any of this?” I would defy orders. I mean, in this situation, when the future of human civilization hangs in the balance, to be the person that says, “Yes, launch,” no matter what, I just can’t see a human being on earth being able to do that in the United States of America. That’s a hell of a decision. Like, this is it. That’s it.
I mean, fundamentally, it feels like just looking at all the presidents of the United States in my lifetime, it feels like none of them are qualified for this six minutes. I could see as being the commander of STRATCOM being like, “This guy?” Basically respecting no president. I know you’re supposed to, commander in chief, but in this situation… I mean everybody, Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden. If I was a commander of STRATCOM, I’d be like, “What does this guy know about any of this?” I would defy orders. I mean, in this situation, when the future of human civilization hangs in the balance, to be the person that says, “Yes, launch,” no matter what, I just can’t see a human being on earth being able to do that in the United States of America. That’s a hell of a decision. Like, this is it. That’s it.
Annie Jacobsen
That’s it. Well, but now you’ve raised a great important presentation essentially, because what you’re saying is, “People, be aware.” Be aware of why you’re voting, or why certain individuals are being escalated to even being able to run for president. What does that mean? Why are people in America not more involved? As citizens do we have a responsibility for that? Because you’ve opened up the door for people to understand, okay, the ultimate thing is the nuclear launch decision. So if a person can’t be trusted with that, everything unravels from there.
That’s it. Well, but now you’ve raised a great important presentation essentially, because what you’re saying is, “People, be aware.” Be aware of why you’re voting, or why certain individuals are being escalated to even being able to run for president. What does that mean? Why are people in America not more involved? As citizens do we have a responsibility for that? Because you’ve opened up the door for people to understand, okay, the ultimate thing is the nuclear launch decision. So if a person can’t be trusted with that, everything unravels from there.
Lex Fridman
Also, I want to look up who’s the commander of STRATCOM now. Speaking of which, you’ve interviewed a lot of experts for this book. Is there some commonalities about the way, you’ve talked about this a little bit, but in the way they see this whole situation? What scares them the most about this whole system and the whole possibility of nuclear war?
Also, I want to look up who’s the commander of STRATCOM now. Speaking of which, you’ve interviewed a lot of experts for this book. Is there some commonalities about the way, you’ve talked about this a little bit, but in the way they see this whole situation? What scares them the most about this whole system and the whole possibility of nuclear war?
Annie Jacobsen
I first learned about nuclear weapons from a guy called Al O’Donnell, who appears in my earlier books, because I interviewed him for over a period of four and a half years because he was an engineer who actually wired nuclear bombs in the 1950s. He was a member of the Manhattan Project in 1946. Worked on Operation Crossroads, the first explosions of nuclear bombs after the war ended, after World War II ended, and went on to arm, wire, and fire 186 out of the 200 some odd atmospheric nuclear tests that the United States did before this was banned. I learned from him the power of these weapons. And I learned from him this very almost nationalistic idea about how important it was to have nuclear weapons. And while I learned a lot about his human side, I also saw the side of him that was very Cold War warrior. So he was kind of the first.
I first learned about nuclear weapons from a guy called Al O’Donnell, who appears in my earlier books, because I interviewed him for over a period of four and a half years because he was an engineer who actually wired nuclear bombs in the 1950s. He was a member of the Manhattan Project in 1946. Worked on Operation Crossroads, the first explosions of nuclear bombs after the war ended, after World War II ended, and went on to arm, wire, and fire 186 out of the 200 some odd atmospheric nuclear tests that the United States did before this was banned. I learned from him the power of these weapons. And I learned from him this very almost nationalistic idea about how important it was to have nuclear weapons. And while I learned a lot about his human side, I also saw the side of him that was very Cold War warrior. So he was kind of the first.
And then, I don’t know, there’ve been 100 people that have been directly involved in nuclear weapons along the way. Billy Waugh, who was my main sort of central figure in a book I wrote about the CIA’s paramilitary called Surprise, Kill, Vanish. And Waugh HALO jumped a tactical nuclear weapon into the Nevada test site with a small team. Almost unknown to anyone, right? Only recently declassified. And so his position was like, “Tactical nuclear weapons may end up being used.”
I’m trying to speak here to the scope of different people I have interviewed over the years. And what has happened is as I’ve gotten closer to the present day, in arrears, there seems to be a growing movement from some of these Cold warriors off the position of, “Nuclear weapons make us great and strong,” toward “Something must be done to reduce this threat.”
Russia and Putin
Lex Fridman
How much do you know, in the same way that you know about the United States, how much do you know about the Russian side? Maybe the Chinese side, India and Pakistan, all of this? How their thinking differs, perhaps?
How much do you know, in the same way that you know about the United States, how much do you know about the Russian side? Maybe the Chinese side, India and Pakistan, all of this? How their thinking differs, perhaps?
Annie Jacobsen
Well, for that, you want to go to the experts. So for Russia, for example, there’s a guy called Pavel Podvig who is probably the West’s top expert on Russian nuclear forces. He works in parallel with the U.N. He also studied in Moscow. So my information comes from him. You do all the footwork to know what questions to ask, and then you take the very specific questions to him. And I learned from him about how the Russian command and control goes down. And it’s very similar to ours, because America and Russia have been at sort of nuclear dueling with one another for 75 years now. And so everything we have, they have, with the exception of we have a great satellite system and they have a super flawed one. Theirs is called Tundra. And even Pavel Podvig admitted that there’s serious flaws in Tundra. The Russian satellite system, for example, can mistake sunlight for flames, can mistake clouds for a nuclear launch. This is a fact.
Well, for that, you want to go to the experts. So for Russia, for example, there’s a guy called Pavel Podvig who is probably the West’s top expert on Russian nuclear forces. He works in parallel with the U.N. He also studied in Moscow. So my information comes from him. You do all the footwork to know what questions to ask, and then you take the very specific questions to him. And I learned from him about how the Russian command and control goes down. And it’s very similar to ours, because America and Russia have been at sort of nuclear dueling with one another for 75 years now. And so everything we have, they have, with the exception of we have a great satellite system and they have a super flawed one. Theirs is called Tundra. And even Pavel Podvig admitted that there’s serious flaws in Tundra. The Russian satellite system, for example, can mistake sunlight for flames, can mistake clouds for a nuclear launch. This is a fact.
What was interesting in interviewing him was also this recent very, very dangerous shift in Russian nuclear policy, which is this: Many Russian experts will tell you that Russia has always maintained that it never had a launch on warning policy. Now, I don’t know if I believe that’s true, but I’m just telling you what they say. And this is coming from the generals, the Cold War generals in Soviet Russia saying, “Oh, no, no, no. We would wait.” They were kind of playing the noble warrior. “We would wait to absorb a nuclear attack until we launched.” Okay? So many Americans experts will tell you that that’s just posturing and propaganda. But that was their official position, and that changed just two years ago when Putin gave a speech and he said that their position had changed, that they will no longer wait to absorb an attack. That once they learn of, how did he phrase it? He called it like the trajectory of the missiles, which is a way of, we’re talking about parody, the same way we see the missile coming over in Midcourse. Putin made that same statement, and said, “We would launch.”
Lex Fridman
What do you know of the way Putin thinks about nuclear weapons and nuclear war? Is it just something to allude to in a speech? Or do you think he contemplates the possibilities of nuclear war?
What do you know of the way Putin thinks about nuclear weapons and nuclear war? Is it just something to allude to in a speech? Or do you think he contemplates the possibilities of nuclear war?
Annie Jacobsen
I don’t know, but if I had to guess it would go like this. I would look at his background, and he comes from the intelligence world. My experience in interviewing old timers who’ve spent decades working for the CIA or even NRO or NSA, I know the way they think from having spent hundreds of hours interviewing them. And then I know the way that military men think, and it’s very different. Putin’s not a military person per se; he’s an intelligence officer. So what would concern me there if I had to guess about his mindset has to do with paranoia. Most intelligence officers must have a degree of healthy paranoia, or they’re going to wind up dead. And so that’s not a great quality to have.
I don’t know, but if I had to guess it would go like this. I would look at his background, and he comes from the intelligence world. My experience in interviewing old timers who’ve spent decades working for the CIA or even NRO or NSA, I know the way they think from having spent hundreds of hours interviewing them. And then I know the way that military men think, and it’s very different. Putin’s not a military person per se; he’s an intelligence officer. So what would concern me there if I had to guess about his mindset has to do with paranoia. Most intelligence officers must have a degree of healthy paranoia, or they’re going to wind up dead. And so that’s not a great quality to have.
Lex Fridman
You would be more trigger-happy perhaps. So you would be more prone to respond to erroneous signals.
You would be more trigger-happy perhaps. So you would be more prone to respond to erroneous signals.
Annie Jacobsen
And you’d be suspicious, and you can see that now. There’s such a incredible distrust and sort of real conflict between Russia, between its leader and NATO, between its leader and all of the West. And then that is fueled by his closest advisors. From the statements they have made that I’ve read in translation, they seem to be fostering that same idea that NATO really has it in for Russia. America really has it in. And that is so dangerous and disheartening.
And you’d be suspicious, and you can see that now. There’s such a incredible distrust and sort of real conflict between Russia, between its leader and NATO, between its leader and all of the West. And then that is fueled by his closest advisors. From the statements they have made that I’ve read in translation, they seem to be fostering that same idea that NATO really has it in for Russia. America really has it in. And that is so dangerous and disheartening.
Lex Fridman
And perhaps makes it less likely that the president would pick up the phone and talk to the other president.
And perhaps makes it less likely that the president would pick up the phone and talk to the other president.
Annie Jacobsen
Or that the close advisors near the president would make that happen.
Or that the close advisors near the president would make that happen.
Cyberattack
Lex Fridman
You were talking about the procedure with the football. Is there any concern for cyber attacks? For security concerns at every level here, false signals, errors, shutting down the channels of communication through cyber attacks, all that kind of stuff?
You were talking about the procedure with the football. Is there any concern for cyber attacks? For security concerns at every level here, false signals, errors, shutting down the channels of communication through cyber attacks, all that kind of stuff?
Annie Jacobsen
To answer those questions, I interviewed a number of people, but most specifically General Touhill, who was Obama’s cyber chief. He was actually America’s first cyber chief. The nuclear command and control system and really the triad functions on analog systems. It functions on old school systems. If there’s not digital interface, you can’t hack into it. So most of the issues that I raise in the book have to do with what happens to cyber after a nuclear attack? What happens to cyber in the minutes after a bomb, a nuclear weapon strikes America, and how that impacts the ability for people to communicate with one another? That’s when chaos takes control.
To answer those questions, I interviewed a number of people, but most specifically General Touhill, who was Obama’s cyber chief. He was actually America’s first cyber chief. The nuclear command and control system and really the triad functions on analog systems. It functions on old school systems. If there’s not digital interface, you can’t hack into it. So most of the issues that I raise in the book have to do with what happens to cyber after a nuclear attack? What happens to cyber in the minutes after a bomb, a nuclear weapon strikes America, and how that impacts the ability for people to communicate with one another? That’s when chaos takes control.
Ground zero of nuclear war
Lex Fridman
Well, let’s talk about it. So God forbid if a nuclear weapon reaches its target, what happens? Perhaps you could say what you think would be the first target hit. Would it be the Pentagon?
Well, let’s talk about it. So God forbid if a nuclear weapon reaches its target, what happens? Perhaps you could say what you think would be the first target hit. Would it be the Pentagon?
Annie Jacobsen
I was told by many people I interviewed that the biggest fear in Washington, DC is what’s called a bolt out of the blue attack. That’s an unwarned nuclear attack against Washington, DC. The target would be the Pentagon, and that’s what I begin the scenario with. I reported in graphic, horrifying detail what happens.
I was told by many people I interviewed that the biggest fear in Washington, DC is what’s called a bolt out of the blue attack. That’s an unwarned nuclear attack against Washington, DC. The target would be the Pentagon, and that’s what I begin the scenario with. I reported in graphic, horrifying detail what happens.
Lex Fridman
Yes, you did.
Yes, you did.
Annie Jacobsen
Because I don’t know what’s worse, me writing that all out, or the fact that it’s all documented by the Defense Department. I mean, they have been documenting the effect of nuclear weapons on people and animals and things since the earliest days of the Cold War. And all of the details I pull are from these documents like The Effects of Nuclear Weapons. And again, this document was the original information, the original data, and this document come from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was all classified. And then it was built upon by those 200 some odd atmospheric nuclear weapons tests we did.
Because I don’t know what’s worse, me writing that all out, or the fact that it’s all documented by the Defense Department. I mean, they have been documenting the effect of nuclear weapons on people and animals and things since the earliest days of the Cold War. And all of the details I pull are from these documents like The Effects of Nuclear Weapons. And again, this document was the original information, the original data, and this document come from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was all classified. And then it was built upon by those 200 some odd atmospheric nuclear weapons tests we did.
We’re talking about millimeters and inches. We’re talking about the Defense Department knowing that, oh, seven and a half miles out the upholstery on cars will spontaneously combust. The pine needles will catch on fire. They will start more fires. You have all kinds of mayhem and chaos happening based on reported facts from observations. And this is really shocking and grotesque at the same time.
Lex Fridman
So one warhead reaches the Pentagon, everybody in the Pentagon perishes.
So one warhead reaches the Pentagon, everybody in the Pentagon perishes.
Annie Jacobsen
180 million degrees. The fireball on a one megaton nuclear weapon is 19 football fields of fire. Think about that. Nothing remains. Nothing remains.
180 million degrees. The fireball on a one megaton nuclear weapon is 19 football fields of fire. Think about that. Nothing remains. Nothing remains.
Lex Fridman
There’s then a radius where people die immediately, and then there’s people that are dead when found, and then there’s people that will die slowly in centric rings.
There’s then a radius where people die immediately, and then there’s people that are dead when found, and then there’s people that will die slowly in centric rings.
Annie Jacobsen
And again, rings defined by Defense scientists. But before that, the bomb goes off. Then there’s this blast wave that’s like several hundred miles an hour pushing out like a bulldozer, knocking everything down, bridges, buildings. I mean, you can read FEMA manuals about what the rubble will be like. You’re talking about 30 feet deep rubble as the buildings go over, 6, 7, 8, 10 miles out. That speaks nothing of the mega fires that will then ensue. So once all these people die, and third degree radiation burns. Did you even know there was such a thing as fourth degree radiation burns? We’re talking about the wind ripping the skin off people’s faces many miles out.
And again, rings defined by Defense scientists. But before that, the bomb goes off. Then there’s this blast wave that’s like several hundred miles an hour pushing out like a bulldozer, knocking everything down, bridges, buildings. I mean, you can read FEMA manuals about what the rubble will be like. You’re talking about 30 feet deep rubble as the buildings go over, 6, 7, 8, 10 miles out. That speaks nothing of the mega fires that will then ensue. So once all these people die, and third degree radiation burns. Did you even know there was such a thing as fourth degree radiation burns? We’re talking about the wind ripping the skin off people’s faces many miles out.
And then you have a sucking action. Many people are familiar with what the nuclear mushroom cloud looks like. Its stem actually creates, and again, this is from physicists who advise the Defense Department on this, the sucking up into the nuclear stem, 300 mile an hour winds. You’re talking about people miles out getting sucked up into that stem. When you see the mushroom cloud, Lex, in a nuclear war, that would be people. Those are like the remnants of people and of things in the cloud; 30, 40 mile wide mushroom cloud blocking out the sun, and that speaks nothing of the radiation poisoning that follows.
Surviving nuclear war
Lex Fridman
And then the power grid goes out. Basically everything we rely on in terms of systems in our way of life goes out. You write, “Those who somehow managed to escape death by the initial blast, shockwave, and firestorm suddenly realize an insidious truth about nuclear war, that they’re entirely on their own.” Here begins a “fight for food and water.” I mean, that is a wake-up call on top of a wake-up call that we go back to a kind of primitive fight for survival, each on their own.
And then the power grid goes out. Basically everything we rely on in terms of systems in our way of life goes out. You write, “Those who somehow managed to escape death by the initial blast, shockwave, and firestorm suddenly realize an insidious truth about nuclear war, that they’re entirely on their own.” Here begins a “fight for food and water.” I mean, that is a wake-up call on top of a wake-up call that we go back to a kind of primitive fight for survival, each on their own.
Annie Jacobsen
And by the way, those details were given to me by Obama’s FEMA director, Craig Fugate. FEMA is the agency in America that plans for nuclear war. And what Fugate said to me was, “Annie, we plan for asteroid strikes. These are called low probability but high consequence events.” And FEMA is the organization that when there’s a hurricane or an earthquake or a flood, FEMA steps in and they do what’s called population protection planning. They take care of people. And what Fugate told me is after a nuclear strike, after a bolt out of the blue attack, he used those terms, there is no population protection. Everyone’s dead. And he means that metaphorically, but also kind of more literally. Because he just said at that point, “You just hope that you stocked Pedialyte.”
And by the way, those details were given to me by Obama’s FEMA director, Craig Fugate. FEMA is the agency in America that plans for nuclear war. And what Fugate said to me was, “Annie, we plan for asteroid strikes. These are called low probability but high consequence events.” And FEMA is the organization that when there’s a hurricane or an earthquake or a flood, FEMA steps in and they do what’s called population protection planning. They take care of people. And what Fugate told me is after a nuclear strike, after a bolt out of the blue attack, he used those terms, there is no population protection. Everyone’s dead. And he means that metaphorically, but also kind of more literally. Because he just said at that point, “You just hope that you stocked Pedialyte.”
Lex Fridman
What do you think happens to humans? How does human nature manifest itself in-
What do you think happens to humans? How does human nature manifest itself in-
Lex Fridman
How does human nature manifest itself in such conditions? Do you think brutality will come out? People will, just for survival, will steal, will murder, will.
How does human nature manifest itself in such conditions? Do you think brutality will come out? People will, just for survival, will steal, will murder, will.
Annie Jacobsen
I can’t imagine that not happening. I think that’s why people love post-apocalyptic television shows and films because they see that. And then, of course, there’s always one great charismatic person who’s trying to restore morality. These are great narratives that people like to tell themselves in the world of science fiction. But what we’re dealing with is science fact in this scenario. It is meant to terrify people into realizing, wait a minute, this is a conversation that absolutely should be had, while it can still be had, because the realities, when you have the director of FEMA telling you this, it’s a real wake-up call.
I can’t imagine that not happening. I think that’s why people love post-apocalyptic television shows and films because they see that. And then, of course, there’s always one great charismatic person who’s trying to restore morality. These are great narratives that people like to tell themselves in the world of science fiction. But what we’re dealing with is science fact in this scenario. It is meant to terrify people into realizing, wait a minute, this is a conversation that absolutely should be had, while it can still be had, because the realities, when you have the director of FEMA telling you this, it’s a real wake-up call.
By the way, Craig Fugate was so transparently human with me, and I quote him directly in the book. But he spoke about, you asked me earlier about what would be going through the president’s mind, and we don’t know, I don’t know, but Craig Fugate told me what would be going through his mind. He said along the lines, I’m paraphrasing, it’s almost something you couldn’t even comprehend. It would just ruin you. His words are really powerful.
Of course, the FEMA director, in the scenario, is notified in that first window while the ballistic missile is on its way and no one in America yet knows. I have the FEMA director pull over to the side of the road and jump in a helicopter that’s sent for him to take him to the bunker that FEMA goes to, which is called Mount Weather. And so, Fugate was aware that, as FEMA director, you would likely be taken to a safe place, however many hours you’re going to be safe, or days or maybe weeks or maybe months.
But as I also learned from the cyber people I interviewed, that there’s a complete fallacy that these military bases can continue functioning. They run on diesel fuel, and when the fuel stops pumping, there’s no more generators.
Lex Fridman
Electricity’s gone. Communication lines are all gone. The food supply. All of it, all the supply chains is gone. It’s terrifying, and that’s just in the first few days, first few hours. In part five, you described the 24 months and beyond after this first hour we’ve been talking about. What happens to earth? What happens to humans if a full-on nuclear war happens?
Electricity’s gone. Communication lines are all gone. The food supply. All of it, all the supply chains is gone. It’s terrifying, and that’s just in the first few days, first few hours. In part five, you described the 24 months and beyond after this first hour we’ve been talking about. What happens to earth? What happens to humans if a full-on nuclear war happens?
Nuclear winter
Annie Jacobsen
For that, I was super privileged to talk to Professor Brian Toon, who’s one of the original five authors of the nuclear winter theory. That theory was published in the early 1980s. One of Professor Toon’s professors was Carl Sagan, who was sort of the most famous author of the nuclear winter theory.
For that, I was super privileged to talk to Professor Brian Toon, who’s one of the original five authors of the nuclear winter theory. That theory was published in the early 1980s. One of Professor Toon’s professors was Carl Sagan, who was sort of the most famous author of the nuclear winter theory.
There were all kinds of controversies about it when it came out, including the Defense Department saying it was Soviet propaganda, which it wasn’t. What the nuclear winter authors conceded back in the ’80s was that their modeling was just the best it could be based on what they had at the time. And so, now flash forward to where we are in 2024, and talking to Professor Toon who’s been working on this issue for all these decades since, he shared with me how the climate models today with the systems we have, the computer systems, reveal that actually nuclear winter is worse.
To answer your questions, the bombs stop falling, in my scenario, 72 minutes after they first launch. The bombs stop falling, and then the megafires begin. Each nuclear weapon will have, according to the Defense Department, a megafire that will burn between 100 and 300 square miles. 1000 weapons, 1500 weapons, think about those megafires. Everything is burning, forests, cities. Think about the pyrotoxins in all the cities. High-rises burning. All of this soot gets lofted into the air, according to Toon, some 300 billion pounds of soot. What happens? It blocks out the sun. Without sun, we have nuclear winter. We have a situation whereby ice sheets form. You’re talking about bodies of water in places like Iowa being frozen for 10 years.
Lex Fridman
So temperature drops.
So temperature drops.
Annie Jacobsen
Temperature plummets. There are all kinds of papers that have been written about this, using modern systems and the numbers vary, but the bottom line is agriculture fails.
Temperature plummets. There are all kinds of papers that have been written about this, using modern systems and the numbers vary, but the bottom line is agriculture fails.
Lex Fridman
Foods obviously dies. The agriculture system completely shuts down, so the food sources shut down. There’s no food. There’s no sun. Temperature drops completely. No electricity.
Foods obviously dies. The agriculture system completely shuts down, so the food sources shut down. There’s no food. There’s no sun. Temperature drops completely. No electricity.
Annie Jacobsen
We haven’t even spoken of radiation poisoning because the radiation poisoning kills many people in the aftermath of the nuclear exchange. But after the nuclear freeze ends, after nuclear winter, after the sun starts to come back, let’s say eight, nine, 10 years, now you have no ozone layer or you have a severely depleted ozone layer. And so, the sun’s rays are now poisonous.
We haven’t even spoken of radiation poisoning because the radiation poisoning kills many people in the aftermath of the nuclear exchange. But after the nuclear freeze ends, after nuclear winter, after the sun starts to come back, let’s say eight, nine, 10 years, now you have no ozone layer or you have a severely depleted ozone layer. And so, the sun’s rays are now poisonous.
If you have people living underground and you have this great thawing, and with that great thawing comes pathogens and plague. You have this system where the small-bodied animals, the insects and whatnot, begin reproducing really fast, and the larger body animals like you and me begin to go extinct. Professor Toon said it to me this way. He said, “66 million years ago, an asteroid hit Earth, killed all the dinosaurs and wiped out 70% of the species, and nuclear war would likely do the same.” And so, here we are talking about this because there is a difference. There’s nothing you can do about an asteroid, but there is something you can do about a nuclear war.
Lex Fridman
Do you think it’s possible that some humans will survive all of this? If we look, I mean, how long would it be? Would it be decades? Would it be centuries before the earth starts to have the capacity to grow food again?
Do you think it’s possible that some humans will survive all of this? If we look, I mean, how long would it be? Would it be decades? Would it be centuries before the earth starts to have the capacity to grow food again?
Annie Jacobsen
Carl Sagan talked about that in this amazing book that he wrote with two scientist colleagues called The Cold and the Dark. There’s a bunch of essays about exactly this. What would happen and how long would it take? It’s really interesting. It’s dated. It’s from the ’80s. But man, is it shocking. You think about that where men return to sort of the worst, most base versions of themselves. Civilization is gone, meaning civil society. There’s no rule of law. It’s just fend for yourself. There’s people fighting over what little resources there are. Man returns to a hunter-gatherer state.
Carl Sagan talked about that in this amazing book that he wrote with two scientist colleagues called The Cold and the Dark. There’s a bunch of essays about exactly this. What would happen and how long would it take? It’s really interesting. It’s dated. It’s from the ’80s. But man, is it shocking. You think about that where men return to sort of the worst, most base versions of themselves. Civilization is gone, meaning civil society. There’s no rule of law. It’s just fend for yourself. There’s people fighting over what little resources there are. Man returns to a hunter-gatherer state.
To really think about this idea, I looked at the oldest known archeological site in the world in Turkey, which is called Gobekli Tepe. It’s really fascinating to me because I interviewed one of the two archeologists who first found this site in the early ’90s. The lead archeologist was a guy named Klaus Schmidt, and Michael Morsch was the young graduate student who was with him. Morsch’s description of coming upon this rumored to be site, there was something called a wishing tree on the site, which I just found so human and perfect, that it was this magical place, and it was Locatable because there was a wishing tree on a hill. It’s where people went to wish and to hope that their wishes came true. I mean, how human is that?
That is where beneath the wishing tree, in the shadow of the wishing tree, there was a tepe, which is a hill. Beneath that, there is the oldest known civilization in the world. 12,000 years ago, a group of hunter-gatherers built this site. Why? We don’t know. But I imagined through Morsch’s descriptions of coming upon. He tripped on a rock, he told me. He tripped over a stone that turned out to be the top part of a 12,000 year old sculpted man, giant pillar. He talked about coming upon that. And then, no one knows really what Gobekli Tepe was for.
That makes my mind try and answer the question you asked me internally, just as a human who’s here on earth for the amount of time I’m here. If there were a nuclear war, what would it be like? What would it be like when someone in the future, would we become archeologists one day? Would civilization rebuild? Would we develop computers? Who knows? It’s interesting to think about. I hope we never have to.
Lex Fridman
What would we remember about this time?
What would we remember about this time?
Annie Jacobsen
Right.
Right.
Lex Fridman
It is terrifying to think that most of it will be forgotten. Everything we assume will not be forgotten. We think maybe some of the technological developments will be forgotten, but we assume some of history won’t be forgotten. But realistically, especially us descending into primitive survival, probably everything since the industrial age will be forgotten. Everything.
It is terrifying to think that most of it will be forgotten. Everything we assume will not be forgotten. We think maybe some of the technological developments will be forgotten, but we assume some of history won’t be forgotten. But realistically, especially us descending into primitive survival, probably everything since the industrial age will be forgotten. Everything.
Maybe some religious ideas will persist. Some stories and myths will persist. But all the wisdom we’ve gathered, higher level sort of technological wisdom would be gone. That’s terrifying to think about. Maybe even, as you touch on, the very fact of nuclear war might be forgotten. The lessons of nuclear war might be forgotten. That there are these weapons, sort of the obvious elephant in the room would be one of the things that’s completely forgotten or become so vague in the recollection of humans that our understanding will change. It’s almost as if a God descended on earth and destroyed everything. Maybe that’s how it will persist. Mythological interpretation of what nuclear weapons are. That’s terrifying because then it could repeat again.
Annie Jacobsen
But I think, for me, the idea of what is buried becomes very interesting and very human, and in a strange way, optimistic and positive because if you can visualize that wishing tree, and I have a picture of it in the book from one of the archeologists who work on that, you think, “What were they wishing? What were they wishing for?” And then, you think of your own self, what do I wish for in this world? Because I do think all things come from what happens metaphorically around the dinner table. What people put their eyes on becomes interesting and expands what people talk about. Ultimately, when you think about the long arc of time and human civilization, it does kind of make you want to communicate more with your enemies, with your adversaries. I think about the quote, what Einstein has said to have said, which is that he was asked what weapons World War III would be fought with. He said, “I don’t know, but I know that World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”
But I think, for me, the idea of what is buried becomes very interesting and very human, and in a strange way, optimistic and positive because if you can visualize that wishing tree, and I have a picture of it in the book from one of the archeologists who work on that, you think, “What were they wishing? What were they wishing for?” And then, you think of your own self, what do I wish for in this world? Because I do think all things come from what happens metaphorically around the dinner table. What people put their eyes on becomes interesting and expands what people talk about. Ultimately, when you think about the long arc of time and human civilization, it does kind of make you want to communicate more with your enemies, with your adversaries. I think about the quote, what Einstein has said to have said, which is that he was asked what weapons World War III would be fought with. He said, “I don’t know, but I know that World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”
Alien civilizations
Lex Fridman
Let me ask you about the great filter. When you look up into our galaxy, into our universe, look up at the sky, do you think there’s other alien civilizations that are contending with some similar questions? Perhaps the reason we have not definitively seen alien civilizations is because the others have failed to find a solution to this great filter. Something like nuclear weapons.
Let me ask you about the great filter. When you look up into our galaxy, into our universe, look up at the sky, do you think there’s other alien civilizations that are contending with some similar questions? Perhaps the reason we have not definitively seen alien civilizations is because the others have failed to find a solution to this great filter. Something like nuclear weapons.
Annie Jacobsen
I’m not sure. I’m going to have to think about that question. But what does come to mind is an answer that was given to me similarly by Ed Mitchell, who went to the moon. He was the sixth man to walk on the moon. And so, his opinion, I think, might count a little more than mine on that subject because his lens is so much greater.
I’m not sure. I’m going to have to think about that question. But what does come to mind is an answer that was given to me similarly by Ed Mitchell, who went to the moon. He was the sixth man to walk on the moon. And so, his opinion, I think, might count a little more than mine on that subject because his lens is so much greater.
Mitchell was vilified when he got back from the moon because it became known that he believed in things like extrasensory perception and this kind of mystical, metaphysical way of looking at the world. He really suffered from that. I mean, he was ridiculed and he lost a lot of his career and his friends. But what he said to me in our interview about his trip home from the moon answers that great filter question, I think, in a way I might want to adopt, which is this.
He said that as they were returning from the moon to earth, he looked down at the earth, and I’m paraphrasing him, I write all this in Phenomena, an earlier book, but the paraphrasing is that he looked down from the earth and it was 1971. He thought about all the conflict going on down below, particularly the Vietnam War where many of his friends were. And then, he looked behind him into the great vast galaxy. He had a moment, he says, that was like an epiphany. Not a near-death experience, but a sort of near-life experience where he believed that the human consciousness, which is where so much of this thoughtfulness about metaphysics and ESP perhaps come from.
Mitchell’s theory, was that human consciousness, the way to understand it, had something to do with realizing that man’s inner life and man’s outer life are deeply connected, in the same way that man is connected to the galaxy. He said it much more eloquently, but you kind of get the idea. I think it’s why humans have always loved to look up, that there’s more there. It’s like the big version of the wishing tree, what do I wish for for myself? What is maybe, perhaps, the realignment of thinking for those of us in search of happiness instead of war. What does it mean to have a conscience, to have consciousness? What does it mean to be a thinking person? What does it mean to be on this earth, to be born, to live, to die? And then, there is legacy. And so, all of those ideas are, I think, foster the kind of conversation that de-escalates conflict.
Lex Fridman
In some deep way, the mysteries of what’s out there when we look out to the stars are the same mysteries that we find when trying to understand the human mind and they’re coupled in some way.
In some deep way, the mysteries of what’s out there when we look out to the stars are the same mysteries that we find when trying to understand the human mind and they’re coupled in some way.
For me, thinking about alien civilizations out there is really the same kind of question, which is, what are we? What is this? What are we doing here? How do we come here? Why does it seem to be so magical and beautiful and powerful? Now, where’s it going? Because it feels like we’re really, perhaps for the first time in history, are in a moment where we can destroy ourselves. And so, naturally you ask, well, where’s others like us? Perhaps, are we inevitably going to a place where we’ll destroy ourselves? Is it basically inevitable that we destroy ourselves? We become too powerful and insufficiently wise to know what to do with that power? But like you said, probably the answers to that are in here. We don’t need to look out there.
Extrasensory perception
I’d love to ask you about the extrasensory perception. You’ve written, like you said, the book Phenomena on the secret history of the US government’s investigations into extrasensory perception and psychokinesis. What are some of the more interesting extrasensory abilities that were explored by the government, and maybe just in general, ESP. What is it? What do you know of it?
Annie Jacobsen
The book was so interesting to report because I spend so much time dealing with mechanized systems, machines, war machines, and yet the military and intelligence were and continue to be incredibly interested in the human mind, in consciousness. And so, if one is called hard science, what we’re talking about now is called squishy science. It was really interesting to delve into that world. It just couldn’t be farther from weapons and war, or could it?
The book was so interesting to report because I spend so much time dealing with mechanized systems, machines, war machines, and yet the military and intelligence were and continue to be incredibly interested in the human mind, in consciousness. And so, if one is called hard science, what we’re talking about now is called squishy science. It was really interesting to delve into that world. It just couldn’t be farther from weapons and war, or could it?
And then, I really began thinking, well, before science and technology, sort of the supernatural ruled the world. The Oracle of Delphi in Greece exists before the common era rulers to go and beg to learn from the powers that be what was going to happen. All ESP programs, I think, pull from that origin story, the leader’s desire to know. And so, I really found it amazing that many people think these systems, or rather these programs, started in the ’70s. I learned they actually began right after World War II. That was because, and in my reporting, I find all things sort of always circle back to the Third Reich, to the Nazis.
The Nazis had a massive occult program, an ESP program, psychokinesis program, astrology. Both Hitler and Himmler were deeply interested in these occult concepts. After I learned from records at the National Archives that after the war, half of everything went to the Soviet Union, and I’m talking about the trove of Nazi documents from which the superpowers were then going to learn to fight future wars, and half of them went to the United States. And so, we got this trove of documents about all of this, and the Soviets got the other. And so, it set off a kind of psychic arms race, which in a weird way paralleled the nuclear arms race, which we’ve been talking about, in as much that it led one side to constantly wonder what the other side had.
Lex Fridman
Have they been able to find anything interesting in this squishy science analysis of trying to see how the human mind could be used as a weapon?
Have they been able to find anything interesting in this squishy science analysis of trying to see how the human mind could be used as a weapon?
Annie Jacobsen
The CIA most definitely believed, from my reading of the documents, that there was something very legit, shall we say, about ESP. It was uncontrollable, it was unreliable, but nonetheless it existed. Being the intelligence agency that they are, they cared less about why it worked. They just wanted to know how they could use it. And then, it got into all kinds of elements of placebo effect.
The CIA most definitely believed, from my reading of the documents, that there was something very legit, shall we say, about ESP. It was uncontrollable, it was unreliable, but nonetheless it existed. Being the intelligence agency that they are, they cared less about why it worked. They just wanted to know how they could use it. And then, it got into all kinds of elements of placebo effect.
When the military stepped in and got involved in the programs, that was a complete disaster, in my opinion, because the military needs to control everything in a mechanized, systematic way. And so, they started, for example, teaching people to be psychic, which is a really, really, really bad idea.
Flash forward to where we are today, these programs still exist. There’s a Navy program which is working, based on a lot of data that came back from the war on terror, with certain soldiers knowing, “Wait, don’t walk down that path. There is an IED there.” They call this the spidey sense, and they actually have a program that works from this. These things never go away. They circle around in terms of being made fun of and then taken seriously, and a little of this and of that. My biggest takeaway from writing that book was a quote that I referenced in the beginning, which is the Thomas theorem, and it says, if men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences.
Lex Fridman
I mean, placebo, as you’ve mentioned, is a fascinating concept. By the way, a short plug, I started listening to it, Andrew Huberman just released a podcast on placebo, the placebo effect.
I mean, placebo, as you’ve mentioned, is a fascinating concept. By the way, a short plug, I started listening to it, Andrew Huberman just released a podcast on placebo, the placebo effect.
Annie Jacobsen
Does he know the origin story of placebo? We’ll have to ask him.
Does he know the origin story of placebo? We’ll have to ask him.
Lex Fridman
We’ll have to ask him.
We’ll have to ask him.
Annie Jacobsen
Are you ready for this?
Are you ready for this?
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Annie Jacobsen
CIA. Not only that, I can tell you that Dr. Henry Beecher, Harvard, I think he was also at MIT for a bit, he came up with that term. You might even say for the CIA.
CIA. Not only that, I can tell you that Dr. Henry Beecher, Harvard, I think he was also at MIT for a bit, he came up with that term. You might even say for the CIA.
Lex Fridman
Does that trouble you that so much of this is coming from the CIA first?
Does that trouble you that so much of this is coming from the CIA first?
Annie Jacobsen
You mean the placebo concept or the-
You mean the placebo concept or the-
Lex Fridman
The placebo concept, but a lot of the sort of scientific investigations.
The placebo concept, but a lot of the sort of scientific investigations.
Annie Jacobsen
Listen, I have such mixed feelings about the CIA, as one should. I think you should have mixed feelings about anything that you cover as a reporter or as a human, and maybe change that from mixed to conflicting, because there are really positive elements of every organization within the federal government.
Listen, I have such mixed feelings about the CIA, as one should. I think you should have mixed feelings about anything that you cover as a reporter or as a human, and maybe change that from mixed to conflicting, because there are really positive elements of every organization within the federal government.
I mean, my first learning about the CIA came from the work I did on the Area 51 book about their aerial reconnaissance programs, which were set up again to prevent World War III, nuclear World War III. It was this idea that information was king. The U-2 spy pane was developed out at Area 51. I interviewed Hervey Stockman, the first man to fly over the Soviet Union in a U-2, gathered all this intelligence, prevented wars. Later, I wrote a book about the CIA’s paramilitary, Surprise, Kill, Vanish. Just when I was thinking, “Wow, the CIA is doing all this amazing non-kinetic activity with aerial reconnaissance, then you learn about their kill programs,” and that’s a whole different set of issues.
Lex Fridman
It turns out, as you write in that book, that the CIA assassinates people sometimes, and we’ll talk about it. But anyway, like you said, conflicting feelings.
It turns out, as you write in that book, that the CIA assassinates people sometimes, and we’ll talk about it. But anyway, like you said, conflicting feelings.
Annie Jacobsen
I mean, I work with sources to report my books. And so, put yourself in my shoes. I interview for dozens or hundreds of hours, my primary sources. In the case of the Surprise, Kill, Vanish book, I traveled with Billy Waugh, the longest-serving CIA operator, back to the scene of the crime, back to the battle. We went to Hanoi. We went to Havana. You really get to know someone, and that’s when I say conflicting. I work with sources on a real trust basis.
I mean, I work with sources to report my books. And so, put yourself in my shoes. I interview for dozens or hundreds of hours, my primary sources. In the case of the Surprise, Kill, Vanish book, I traveled with Billy Waugh, the longest-serving CIA operator, back to the scene of the crime, back to the battle. We went to Hanoi. We went to Havana. You really get to know someone, and that’s when I say conflicting. I work with sources on a real trust basis.
Sometimes people will tell me things. They’ll say, “Annie, this is off the record. This is for you to know about me on deep background because I want you to know who I am,” and that’s powerful and a lot of times personal. It’s personal. It’s about their personal life, and it isn’t apropos to what I’m writing about, but I need to know that. That’s where it gets conflicted, in a good way, because you realize where we’re all such creatures of our personal lives. You have a professional life where national security are in your hands. I don’t know what that is like.
Lex Fridman
I wonder if you could just speak to that. You’ve interviewed so many powerful people, so many fascinating people. As you’ve spoken about, trust is fundamental to that, so they open up and really show you into their world. What does it take to do that?
I wonder if you could just speak to that. You’ve interviewed so many powerful people, so many fascinating people. As you’ve spoken about, trust is fundamental to that, so they open up and really show you into their world. What does it take to do that?
Annie Jacobsen
I think willingness. We were talking about trust earlier. I have to trust that there’s a reason I find myself in a certain situation. Otherwise, it would just be a constant doubt paradox. Why am I here? What am I doing? And so, I trust that I’m going to learn something of value. And so, I’m willing to listen. I really am willing to listen. So far, it’s always proven… The expectations I might have going into something are dwarfed by the outcome because people are so interesting and because the people that I interview, because I write about war and weapons and national security and government secrets, and the people I interview are at the heart of all of this. I mean, they are really capable people, intellectually brilliant, physically capable. They go so far out on the limb to do their jobs.
I think willingness. We were talking about trust earlier. I have to trust that there’s a reason I find myself in a certain situation. Otherwise, it would just be a constant doubt paradox. Why am I here? What am I doing? And so, I trust that I’m going to learn something of value. And so, I’m willing to listen. I really am willing to listen. So far, it’s always proven… The expectations I might have going into something are dwarfed by the outcome because people are so interesting and because the people that I interview, because I write about war and weapons and national security and government secrets, and the people I interview are at the heart of all of this. I mean, they are really capable people, intellectually brilliant, physically capable. They go so far out on the limb to do their jobs.
By the way, the reason they’re talking to me is because they’re still alive and so many of their colleagues are dead. It gives them also a wisdom about life, about sacrifice, not in cliched sort of nationalistic jingoistic terms whatsoever. I’m talking real. What is their real truth?
When I went to Vietnam with Billy Waugh, I mean, the details are just every detail. I mean, starting with the fact that he showed up at my house with a giant suitcase and a bunch of clothes, dry cleaning, pressed clothes in plastic hangers, carrying them. I’m like, “Billy, we’re going to Vietnam and we’re going back into the jungle to find the Oscar-8 battle site. What are you carrying?” He got really mad at me, did not like anyone correcting him. I got my husband on the job, like, “Kevin, you got to sort this out.”
What transpired was that Billy Waugh had never taken a trip for personal reasons. He operated, I think, in 62 countries, every single time for the CIA. It would go like this, Billy, go to there and get to there, and that’s what he would do. When he arrived, whatever he needed, he would just get. It’s not a fashion trip. He had no idea how to pack for an overseas trip. This was like, “Oh my God, how can you not have the hugest smile on your face going into this? I’m with a guy whose 89 years old.”
He’d had eight Purple Hearts from Vietnam. I mean, he operated against Osama bin Laden 10 years before 9/11. He went after bin Laden in Afghanistan when he was 72. He went after Qaddafi during the Arab spring when he was 82, and now here he is with me going to Hanoi. The details, those human details. But my husband repacked his bag and got him a proper suitcase that was carryable and small and he wasn’t trailing the hangers, but it was the trip home in the taxi that I got at this really big reveal.
Billy reached into that small suitcase my husband had given him and pulled out a rolled up American flag. He had taken this flag, because I had tried to help him pack and he wouldn’t let me, and I just thought it was like an old guy being stubborn, but he didn’t want me to see that he was bringing an American flag to Vietnam, which is not legal. He wanted to bring that flag and take it around everywhere with him, as he explained to me later, to honor all of his friends who died there 50 years ago.
And then, when the trip was finished, he gave me that flag and it’s in my office. That’s the kind of relationship that you can develop with people as a reporter, if you’re willing to go the extra mile with them, to trust them, that they’ll tell you things of value. To me, something like that is as of value as any secret mission I’m able to get declassified, because we are a nation of people.
Lex Fridman
And…
And…
Annie Jacobsen
… get declassified because we are a nation of people.
… get declassified because we are a nation of people.
Lex Fridman
And probably there’s a bunch of human details that you can’t possibly express in words, things left unspoken, but you saw in the silence exchange between the two of you, the sadness, maybe you could see in his face looking back at memories of the people he’s lost, all that kind of stuff.
And probably there’s a bunch of human details that you can’t possibly express in words, things left unspoken, but you saw in the silence exchange between the two of you, the sadness, maybe you could see in his face looking back at memories of the people he’s lost, all that kind of stuff.
Annie Jacobsen
All that kind of stuff.
All that kind of stuff.
Area 51
Lex Fridman
You mentioned you wrote a book on Area 51. For people who don’t know, you’ve written a lot about security, the military, secrets, all of this kind of stuff. So Area 51 is one of the legendary centers of all of these kinds of topics. So high level first is what is Area 51, as you understand it, as you’ve written about the lore and the reality.
You mentioned you wrote a book on Area 51. For people who don’t know, you’ve written a lot about security, the military, secrets, all of this kind of stuff. So Area 51 is one of the legendary centers of all of these kinds of topics. So high level first is what is Area 51, as you understand it, as you’ve written about the lore and the reality.
Annie Jacobsen
I think everybody wants to know about Area 51, because it’s like this American enigma. It’s like to some people, it’s the Shangri-La of test bed aerospace programs, and to others, it’s the place of captured aliens and everything in between. I had the great fortune of interviewing 75 people who lived and worked at that base for extended periods of time, mostly leading up to the ’90s because everything since then is classified. So things get declassified after decades. Not everything but some. And that allows you to piece together stories.
I think everybody wants to know about Area 51, because it’s like this American enigma. It’s like to some people, it’s the Shangri-La of test bed aerospace programs, and to others, it’s the place of captured aliens and everything in between. I had the great fortune of interviewing 75 people who lived and worked at that base for extended periods of time, mostly leading up to the ’90s because everything since then is classified. So things get declassified after decades. Not everything but some. And that allows you to piece together stories.
Lex Fridman
So you talked to a lot of people that worked there. What can you describe as the history of technological development that went on there?
So you talked to a lot of people that worked there. What can you describe as the history of technological development that went on there?
Annie Jacobsen
I mean, Area 51 is huge, by the way. It’s a top secret military facility inside a top secret military facility inside the Nevada test and training range, which is this massive not secret facility. So you’re just talking about layers, talking about peeling the onion in reverse. And it began as a place to test the U-2 spy plane. And literally the CIA set up shop there to build this plane away from the public eye. And then that led to another espionage platform called the A-12 Oxcart, which is anyone who’s seen the X-Men movies knows about the SR-71. And that’s a two-seater, right? And before that, there was the A-12 Oxcart, and that was the CIA’s stealth Mach 3 spy plane. Think about that in the early 1960s. It’s astonishing. And I interviewed the pilots who flew it.
I mean, Area 51 is huge, by the way. It’s a top secret military facility inside a top secret military facility inside the Nevada test and training range, which is this massive not secret facility. So you’re just talking about layers, talking about peeling the onion in reverse. And it began as a place to test the U-2 spy plane. And literally the CIA set up shop there to build this plane away from the public eye. And then that led to another espionage platform called the A-12 Oxcart, which is anyone who’s seen the X-Men movies knows about the SR-71. And that’s a two-seater, right? And before that, there was the A-12 Oxcart, and that was the CIA’s stealth Mach 3 spy plane. Think about that in the early 1960s. It’s astonishing. And I interviewed the pilots who flew it.
Lex Fridman
What did they say about it? What was it like?
What did they say about it? What was it like?
Annie Jacobsen
Oh my God, look, I describe in detail in Area 51. But also the amazing thing, Lex, about that was that, and I just look back on that with such fondness. This is like in 2009 when I was reporting that, and many of the guys who were in their 80s and 90s were World War II heroes, like serious World War II heroes like Colonel Slater who was the commander of Area 51. He flew the U-2 on the missions called the Black Cat Missions over China in the early 1960s to see about their Lop Nur nuclear facility. So all of these things tie in when you’re reporting on military and intelligence programs. But these guys had been World War II heroes, and then were given this cushy job out at Area 51. And it just came with all these perks.
Oh my God, look, I describe in detail in Area 51. But also the amazing thing, Lex, about that was that, and I just look back on that with such fondness. This is like in 2009 when I was reporting that, and many of the guys who were in their 80s and 90s were World War II heroes, like serious World War II heroes like Colonel Slater who was the commander of Area 51. He flew the U-2 on the missions called the Black Cat Missions over China in the early 1960s to see about their Lop Nur nuclear facility. So all of these things tie in when you’re reporting on military and intelligence programs. But these guys had been World War II heroes, and then were given this cushy job out at Area 51. And it just came with all these perks.
Colonel Slater told me this one perk, I just love so much. They all had a hankering for lobster one day. And here they’re in the middle of the desert in Nevada, and they have these really fast planes, and they literally called, they arranged, they didn’t take the Oxcart out for that one, but they got some lobsters from Massachusetts delivered to them in record time. They didn’t even need to put them on ice. And again, those are these details where you’re like, at least for me, “Thank God I got these details. These guys are all passed now.”
UFOs and aliens
Lex Fridman
So there’s a lot of incredible technological work going on there. So the legend, the lore, like you said, aliens, were there ever aliens in Area 51 as you understand it?
So there’s a lot of incredible technological work going on there. So the legend, the lore, like you said, aliens, were there ever aliens in Area 51 as you understand it?
Annie Jacobsen
So I’ve interviewed hundreds of people.
So I’ve interviewed hundreds of people.
Lex Fridman
That worked there.
That worked there.
Annie Jacobsen
Well, not just at Area 51, but in all the different national security and military intelligence and intelligence programs. And I personally have no reason to believe that aliens have ever visited Earth. That’s just me personally.
Well, not just at Area 51, but in all the different national security and military intelligence and intelligence programs. And I personally have no reason to believe that aliens have ever visited Earth. That’s just me personally.
Lex Fridman
Just at an Earth, period.
Just at an Earth, period.
Annie Jacobsen
I have no information that causes me to conclude that’s the case. Now, with that said, many of the primary players in this present day, there are aliens among us narrative, are in my phenomena book. I continue to communicate with a lot of these people. I’m talking about astrophysicists who fundamentally believe that there are aliens among us. So we beg to differ on that issue.
I have no information that causes me to conclude that’s the case. Now, with that said, many of the primary players in this present day, there are aliens among us narrative, are in my phenomena book. I continue to communicate with a lot of these people. I’m talking about astrophysicists who fundamentally believe that there are aliens among us. So we beg to differ on that issue.
Lex Fridman
But for you, in terms of doing research on government agencies that do top secret military work, I mean they would know. So you have interviewed a lot of people that have, at every layer of the onion, you don’t see evidence or a reason to believe that there was ever aliens or UFOs captured from out of this world.
But for you, in terms of doing research on government agencies that do top secret military work, I mean they would know. So you have interviewed a lot of people that have, at every layer of the onion, you don’t see evidence or a reason to believe that there was ever aliens or UFOs captured from out of this world.
Annie Jacobsen
That is correct. And even perhaps more important, and perhaps this colors my thinking, but I am uniquely familiar with disinformation programs put forth by the CIA or the agency as it’s called by insiders. I’ve learned firsthand about these program or rather learned from firsthand participants in strategic deception campaigns that the CIA has engaged in beginning with Area 51. The idea that all these reports of this U-2 spy plane, this giant long-winged aircraft flying 70,000 feet up, people didn’t think airplanes could fly that high. And it’s the sun shining off of it. It looked like a UFO and all the reports coming in and the CIA opened up a UFO disinformation campaign office headed by a guy named Todos Odarenko specifically for this reason.
That is correct. And even perhaps more important, and perhaps this colors my thinking, but I am uniquely familiar with disinformation programs put forth by the CIA or the agency as it’s called by insiders. I’ve learned firsthand about these program or rather learned from firsthand participants in strategic deception campaigns that the CIA has engaged in beginning with Area 51. The idea that all these reports of this U-2 spy plane, this giant long-winged aircraft flying 70,000 feet up, people didn’t think airplanes could fly that high. And it’s the sun shining off of it. It looked like a UFO and all the reports coming in and the CIA opened up a UFO disinformation campaign office headed by a guy named Todos Odarenko specifically for this reason.
Now, does that mean that every UFO sighting in the world has been a U-2? No, but I come from it from that lane of thinking, and there are so many strategic deception campaigns, and as I look over the decades of how these same UFO stories, and again, this is just my opinion based on my reporting, this narrative that keeps reoccurring, it seems to me like a very large catch- all to keep the public’s attention on that, not on that.
Lex Fridman
So to you, sexy stories like UFOs are going to be leveraged by the CIA for strategic deception.
So to you, sexy stories like UFOs are going to be leveraged by the CIA for strategic deception.
Annie Jacobsen
A hundred percent. I mean, Google Paul Bennewitz, I’m always amazed that Paul Bennewitz’s story is not more widely spoken of. And I think that’s because there’s the sort of ufologists or people who are absolutely convinced that aliens are among us, and I use that term loosely, but you know what I mean. And then there’s the quote unquote, “skeptics”. And the skeptics tend to be sort of like self-righteous, and I would never want to be self-righteous. So I’m not a skeptic, I’m just agnostic, I suppose. But Google Paul Bennewitz, and you can learn the story of that man who thought he saw a UFO in the ’70s, early ’80s, and the Air Force, because the Air Force intelligence community works hand in glove with CIA a lot. And some of the other intelligence agencies, of course, they’re 17, not just the CIA, and they destroyed Paul Bennewitz. They sent him to a mental institution by pulling a massive strategic deception campaign against him because they didn’t want him to know about the technology that he was seeing at Kirtland Air Force Base.
A hundred percent. I mean, Google Paul Bennewitz, I’m always amazed that Paul Bennewitz’s story is not more widely spoken of. And I think that’s because there’s the sort of ufologists or people who are absolutely convinced that aliens are among us, and I use that term loosely, but you know what I mean. And then there’s the quote unquote, “skeptics”. And the skeptics tend to be sort of like self-righteous, and I would never want to be self-righteous. So I’m not a skeptic, I’m just agnostic, I suppose. But Google Paul Bennewitz, and you can learn the story of that man who thought he saw a UFO in the ’70s, early ’80s, and the Air Force, because the Air Force intelligence community works hand in glove with CIA a lot. And some of the other intelligence agencies, of course, they’re 17, not just the CIA, and they destroyed Paul Bennewitz. They sent him to a mental institution by pulling a massive strategic deception campaign against him because they didn’t want him to know about the technology that he was seeing at Kirtland Air Force Base.
So look that up, and then you go, “Oh my God.” And to my eye, you can apply any of these other names substitute in Paul Bennewitz or any of the current individuals who really become convinced of X, Y, or Z, when in fact there’s a strategic deception campaign going on.
Lex Fridman
There’s a lot of incentive for the CIA and other intelligence agencies to get you to look the other way on whatever is happening. Plus, from a enemy perspective, whenever two nations are at war to try to create hysteria in the other.
There’s a lot of incentive for the CIA and other intelligence agencies to get you to look the other way on whatever is happening. Plus, from a enemy perspective, whenever two nations are at war to try to create hysteria in the other.
Annie Jacobsen
But then you have the Thomas theorem, that becomes applicable there too. If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences. So this idea of UFOs and we’re being lied to, it becomes real to many people. And then that creates a whole subset of problems to the point where things are spiraling out of control and there is no center anymore. So a lot of people that are briefed on programs maybe aren’t even aware of their position within a greater campaign, or I’m wrong, and there are aliens among us.
But then you have the Thomas theorem, that becomes applicable there too. If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences. So this idea of UFOs and we’re being lied to, it becomes real to many people. And then that creates a whole subset of problems to the point where things are spiraling out of control and there is no center anymore. So a lot of people that are briefed on programs maybe aren’t even aware of their position within a greater campaign, or I’m wrong, and there are aliens among us.
Lex Fridman
So I appreciate the possibility of acknowledging that you might be wrong. From everything about the US government, if there was an alien spacecraft, what do you think would happen? Would they be able to hold onto those secrets for decades? Would they want to hold onto those secrets? What would they do? What’s your sense?
So I appreciate the possibility of acknowledging that you might be wrong. From everything about the US government, if there was an alien spacecraft, what do you think would happen? Would they be able to hold onto those secrets for decades? Would they want to hold onto those secrets? What would they do? What’s your sense?
Annie Jacobsen
I can’t imagine that kind of exciting situation not becoming public information. And the counter to that is this, which is, this is a very strong argument for why this is a big strategic deception campaign. Think about the Defense Department and the air… Think about how jealously they guard its airspace. I mean, you had a Chinese balloon flying over and the whole world went crazy. It was front page news. So the fact that one element, or a couple people in the defense department have made this statement, we’ve lost control of our airspace over this alleged UFO craft that they can’t explain. I don’t buy that at all. Zero.
I can’t imagine that kind of exciting situation not becoming public information. And the counter to that is this, which is, this is a very strong argument for why this is a big strategic deception campaign. Think about the Defense Department and the air… Think about how jealously they guard its airspace. I mean, you had a Chinese balloon flying over and the whole world went crazy. It was front page news. So the fact that one element, or a couple people in the defense department have made this statement, we’ve lost control of our airspace over this alleged UFO craft that they can’t explain. I don’t buy that at all. Zero.
Lex Fridman
But of course it’s possible that it is alien spacecraft if it is that. And they operate under a very different set of technological capabilities in theory.
But of course it’s possible that it is alien spacecraft if it is that. And they operate under a very different set of technological capabilities in theory.
Annie Jacobsen
In my interviews with Jacques Vallee, who is the kind of grandfather of all ufology, and he’s such an interesting person and has such a really unique origin story about how he came into all of this. And he’s such a scientist, and he is profoundly dedicated to this issue and stands completely on the opposite end of the spectrum from me, and knows a lot more and has studied this for decades more. But what he said to me is the most interesting thing, which is that it’s not a military problem, it’s an intelligence problem. Because Jacques believes that this is some kind of intelligence, which really the closest I can do to wrapping my head around that takes me to consciousness, the idea of what is consciousness. And I think that’s where it becomes very interesting. I think the government is hiding bodies and crafts is very Paul Bennewitz, read it, Google it, look into it, right?
In my interviews with Jacques Vallee, who is the kind of grandfather of all ufology, and he’s such an interesting person and has such a really unique origin story about how he came into all of this. And he’s such a scientist, and he is profoundly dedicated to this issue and stands completely on the opposite end of the spectrum from me, and knows a lot more and has studied this for decades more. But what he said to me is the most interesting thing, which is that it’s not a military problem, it’s an intelligence problem. Because Jacques believes that this is some kind of intelligence, which really the closest I can do to wrapping my head around that takes me to consciousness, the idea of what is consciousness. And I think that’s where it becomes very interesting. I think the government is hiding bodies and crafts is very Paul Bennewitz, read it, Google it, look into it, right?
Lex Fridman
I think this kind of flying saucer thing is a trivialization of what kind of, if there’s alien civilizations out there.
I think this kind of flying saucer thing is a trivialization of what kind of, if there’s alien civilizations out there.
Annie Jacobsen
Trivialization. That’s a great word. Trivialization, I agree with you.
Trivialization. That’s a great word. Trivialization, I agree with you.
Lex Fridman
I tend to believe that there’s a very large number of alien civilizations out there, and I believe we would have trouble comprehending what that even looks like were they to visit. I tend to believe they are already here or have visited, and we’re too dumb to understand what that even means. And they certainly would not appear as flying objects that defy gravity for brief moments of time on a low resolution video. I tend to have humility about all this kind of stuff, but I think radical humility is required to even open your eyes to what an alien intelligence would actually look like. And to me, it’s beyond military applications. It’s like the basic human question of what is even this thing, like you mentioned consciousness that’s going on. Where’s this come from? Why is this so powerful? Is it unique in the universe? I tend to believe not. Of course, I hang out a bunch with other folks like Elon who believe we are alone, but I think that belief, just like you said, has power because it actually manifests itself in reality.
I tend to believe that there’s a very large number of alien civilizations out there, and I believe we would have trouble comprehending what that even looks like were they to visit. I tend to believe they are already here or have visited, and we’re too dumb to understand what that even means. And they certainly would not appear as flying objects that defy gravity for brief moments of time on a low resolution video. I tend to have humility about all this kind of stuff, but I think radical humility is required to even open your eyes to what an alien intelligence would actually look like. And to me, it’s beyond military applications. It’s like the basic human question of what is even this thing, like you mentioned consciousness that’s going on. Where’s this come from? Why is this so powerful? Is it unique in the universe? I tend to believe not. Of course, I hang out a bunch with other folks like Elon who believe we are alone, but I think that belief, just like you said, has power because it actually manifests itself in reality.
Roswell incident
So if you believe that we’re alone in this universe, that’s a great motivator to build rockets and become multi-planetary and save ourselves, especially in the case of nuclear war, because otherwise, whatever this special sauce, this flame of consciousness will go out if we destroy ourselves on this earth. And for people like Elon, it’s too high of a probability that we destroy ourselves on earth not to try to become multi-planetary. In your book on Area 51, you propose an explanation that I think some people have criticized at the very end that this might’ve been a disinformation campaign from, I guess Stalin, that the Roswell incident was a remotely piloted plane with a quote, “grotesque child-sized aviator”. Just looking back at all that now, years later, what’s the probability that it’s true? What’s the probability it’s not?
Annie Jacobsen
So you know I’ve never revealed to that sources.
So you know I’ve never revealed to that sources.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Annie Jacobsen
Did you know that? You want me to tell you?
Did you know that? You want me to tell you?
Lex Fridman
The source?
The source?
Annie Jacobsen
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Who is the source?
Who is the source?
Annie Jacobsen
So before I say anything on that, let me speak to the question that you asked. So you asked me what’s the probability that that is still standing as an idea, 12, 13, 14 years later. So I continued to work with that source for years afterwards. We talked about this. Look, I mean, his whole family knew it was him, and I knew his family because I was an integral part of… I was at his house, met all his kids, grandkids.
So before I say anything on that, let me speak to the question that you asked. So you asked me what’s the probability that that is still standing as an idea, 12, 13, 14 years later. So I continued to work with that source for years afterwards. We talked about this. Look, I mean, his whole family knew it was him, and I knew his family because I was an integral part of… I was at his house, met all his kids, grandkids.
Lex Fridman
We should say the source is the main expert advisor behind the story that it was… Maybe you can explain what the story is that you report in the book that it was disinformation campaign created by Stalin to cause mass hysteria in the United States. The very kind that we’ve been speaking about with the CIA and so on.
We should say the source is the main expert advisor behind the story that it was… Maybe you can explain what the story is that you report in the book that it was disinformation campaign created by Stalin to cause mass hysteria in the United States. The very kind that we’ve been speaking about with the CIA and so on.
Annie Jacobsen
Yes, predicated on the narrative of the War of the Worlds and the War of the Worlds when it was a radio program in the United States made people go crazy. “Oh my God, we’re being invaded by aliens.” Well, the government was always interested in this story, and Joseph Stalin was too. We know that from declassified documents. And so the source told me that the reason for this program and that the real Roswell crash remains were, in fact, it was a black propaganda hoax infiltrated, or rather predicated at this idea that you were going to overwhelm America’s early warning air defense system cause mayhem and maybe be able to attack the United States. That was the plan.
Yes, predicated on the narrative of the War of the Worlds and the War of the Worlds when it was a radio program in the United States made people go crazy. “Oh my God, we’re being invaded by aliens.” Well, the government was always interested in this story, and Joseph Stalin was too. We know that from declassified documents. And so the source told me that the reason for this program and that the real Roswell crash remains were, in fact, it was a black propaganda hoax infiltrated, or rather predicated at this idea that you were going to overwhelm America’s early warning air defense system cause mayhem and maybe be able to attack the United States. That was the plan.
And Stalin was also messing with the United States, messing with Truman, who sort of turned his back on him at Potsdam. And so this idea and the reason that the source is important, and unlike a lot of people, “I saw, I saw this, I saw that, I learned that,” was according to the source, once it was determined that this was a hoax and that Stalin was able to get a craft over the United States, and it crashed and it had people inside of it.
They were people that were sort of deformed and meant surgically altered to look like aliens. The United States government decided that it needed to know what on earth that was all about. And if it was possible for us to have the same program, this according to the source. And so it sounds preposterous, and if it was just someone saying, you might say, “Well, it’s ridiculous,” and get them onto another subject. But the difference was is this source who was very well-placed and friends with all of the other 75 people told me this as a confession, a real tearful confession. Because what he said is he was involved in the American program to do the same thing, and people died because there were human experiments that went on.
And I write about this in the last 12 pages of Area 51. It was an explosive revelation, and I felt very confident in writing this because the source wanted it written. Why? Because he said, “I’m dedicated to my country. I know about being committed to national security, and this kind of thing must never happen. And if you give people too much power, they would take advantage of it.” And he wanted it on the record. And his wife of 60 years did not know until after the book published, nor did his children. So after the book published, I was called to his house and sat there with his family and they said, “Tell us this isn’t true.” And he said, “It is true.” Now that source is Al O’Donnell, who is the nuclear weapons engineer who armed, wired, and fired 186 nuclear weapons. So if you want to talk about someone, you’re the first person I’ve told that on the record, but it’s kind of about time.
Lex Fridman
Wow. Well, you received a lot of criticism over this story, and it confused me why because given the context of everything you’ve described with the CIA and other intelligence agencies, it is reasonable that such as action would be taken.
Wow. Well, you received a lot of criticism over this story, and it confused me why because given the context of everything you’ve described with the CIA and other intelligence agencies, it is reasonable that such as action would be taken.
Annie Jacobsen
And the source is extraordinarily credible. If you wanted to take the position, “Well, that person isn’t very reliable.” Then you have to ask yourself, why did they have top secret clearances that are higher than any in the United States whatsoever? Because he was responsible for arming nuclear bombs. He was called the trigger man, and by the way, he told me that I could tell the world who he was. There’s a lot of details that are really dark involving that program. And when is it appropriate? Right? Well, it feels appropriate now, first of all, because you and I have been talking for several hours. So this is what is truly a long-form conversation, and it’s the outcome of a very long time of my reporting and also being judicious about closing the loop on that because I do think it’s important for people to know that sources have revelations.
And the source is extraordinarily credible. If you wanted to take the position, “Well, that person isn’t very reliable.” Then you have to ask yourself, why did they have top secret clearances that are higher than any in the United States whatsoever? Because he was responsible for arming nuclear bombs. He was called the trigger man, and by the way, he told me that I could tell the world who he was. There’s a lot of details that are really dark involving that program. And when is it appropriate? Right? Well, it feels appropriate now, first of all, because you and I have been talking for several hours. So this is what is truly a long-form conversation, and it’s the outcome of a very long time of my reporting and also being judicious about closing the loop on that because I do think it’s important for people to know that sources have revelations.
CIA assassinations
Lex Fridman
And like you said, the programs both on the Soviet side and the American side, conflicting, I think is the term we used previously, ethically, morally, on all fronts. People have done some horrible things in the name of security. In your book, Surprise, Kill, Vanish, you write about the CIA and the so-called president’s third option. So first of all, first option being diplomacy and second option being war. So when diplomacy is inadequate and war is a terrible idea, we go to the third option. And this third option is about covert action, and it’s about assassination. So how much of that does the CIA do?
And like you said, the programs both on the Soviet side and the American side, conflicting, I think is the term we used previously, ethically, morally, on all fronts. People have done some horrible things in the name of security. In your book, Surprise, Kill, Vanish, you write about the CIA and the so-called president’s third option. So first of all, first option being diplomacy and second option being war. So when diplomacy is inadequate and war is a terrible idea, we go to the third option. And this third option is about covert action, and it’s about assassination. So how much of that does the CIA do?
Annie Jacobsen
That is open to debate. We know from the historical record that the CIA was heavily involved in assassination during the Cold War. That’s non-negotiable. Even the names of the programs that were assigned to perform assassinations are fascinating and now declassified, like Eisenhower’s, for example, was the Health Alteration Committee.
That is open to debate. We know from the historical record that the CIA was heavily involved in assassination during the Cold War. That’s non-negotiable. Even the names of the programs that were assigned to perform assassinations are fascinating and now declassified, like Eisenhower’s, for example, was the Health Alteration Committee.
Lex Fridman
Well, at least they have a sense of humor to this dark topic.
Well, at least they have a sense of humor to this dark topic.
Annie Jacobsen
Then the more modern names are targeted killing, executive action, targeted killing. I mean, drone striking is essentially assassination. And people jump up and down and say, “That’s not true.” Well, I spent quite a long time interviewing the CIA’s lead council, John Rizzo. He died recently. But Rizzo was very forthcoming with me, of course, never sharing classified information, but going up to the edge of what can legally be known. Rizzo was thrown under the bus by sort of the general public for he was the fall guy for the torture campaign. The CIA calls it enhanced interrogation. And so Rizzo had this long career. He began working under the Carter administration and was responsible for the torture memos, was responsible for legally making sure the president’s ass was covered and then got thrown under the bus. And so he was very forthcoming, not in a bitter way, but in a very earnest way about a lot of how these programs are made to be legal.
Then the more modern names are targeted killing, executive action, targeted killing. I mean, drone striking is essentially assassination. And people jump up and down and say, “That’s not true.” Well, I spent quite a long time interviewing the CIA’s lead council, John Rizzo. He died recently. But Rizzo was very forthcoming with me, of course, never sharing classified information, but going up to the edge of what can legally be known. Rizzo was thrown under the bus by sort of the general public for he was the fall guy for the torture campaign. The CIA calls it enhanced interrogation. And so Rizzo had this long career. He began working under the Carter administration and was responsible for the torture memos, was responsible for legally making sure the president’s ass was covered and then got thrown under the bus. And so he was very forthcoming, not in a bitter way, but in a very earnest way about a lot of how these programs are made to be legal.
Because if the President of the United States says they’re legal, they’re legal. Executive Order 12333. It says, we don’t assassinate, but it can be overwritten by another order that’s straight out of Rizzo’s mouth. Also, really important to keep in mind is that the military operates under what’s called Title 50. It’s part of the National Security Code that gives rules and etc. How you must behave in a war theater. Well, the CIA is under no such rules. It operates under what’s called Title 50. And it’s interesting to me as reporter, because before I wrote the book and reported openly about Title 50, it was not really discussed. And now you even see operators themselves on podcasts talking about Title 50, which is kind of great because it’s like the cat’s out of the bag, guys. That’s what it’s called. And that’s how it works. It means what we say goes.
Lex Fridman
Can you elaborate on what Title 50 is? So it basically says assassination is allowed.
Can you elaborate on what Title 50 is? So it basically says assassination is allowed.
Annie Jacobsen
It says what the president wants the president gets, right? And so, I mean, the best example is the killing of Bin Laden. We were not at war with Pakistan, so Title 50 doesn’t apply. You can’t have a military operation in a country you’re not at war with. I mean, the lines, now they’ve really blurred, but even then they were a little more honored. And so what do you do? Well, Leon Panetta was the CIA director, and you work out a scenario whereby the SEALs, and by the way, there was a rotational on that killer capture mission, which was really just a kill mission. SEALs were practicing, Delta was practicing, and special activities division was practicing. They were all practicing at a secret facility in North Carolina. And it was just like they’re ready until they get the go order. And it just happened to be the seals.
It says what the president wants the president gets, right? And so, I mean, the best example is the killing of Bin Laden. We were not at war with Pakistan, so Title 50 doesn’t apply. You can’t have a military operation in a country you’re not at war with. I mean, the lines, now they’ve really blurred, but even then they were a little more honored. And so what do you do? Well, Leon Panetta was the CIA director, and you work out a scenario whereby the SEALs, and by the way, there was a rotational on that killer capture mission, which was really just a kill mission. SEALs were practicing, Delta was practicing, and special activities division was practicing. They were all practicing at a secret facility in North Carolina. And it was just like they’re ready until they get the go order. And it just happened to be the seals.
So the SEALs operate under Title 10. So they had to get what I call sheep-dip because that’s what the insiders call it. And that is a term that comes from interestingly Area 51, the U-2 pilots who were Air Force pilots, they needed to be sheep dipped over to the CIA so they could do things that defied the law. So you can see how these all entwine and you become more and more informed, and you go, “Aha.” Right? So that’s how Title 50 worked. So the night of that mission, it was a CIA mission because the CIA is allowed to go into Pakistan and kill someone, and the military can.
Lex Fridman
That’s fascinating. So people talk about the Navy SEALs doing it, but it’s really legally speaking to get the permission to do it within the whole legal framework of the United States, it was the CIA.
That’s fascinating. So people talk about the Navy SEALs doing it, but it’s really legally speaking to get the permission to do it within the whole legal framework of the United States, it was the CIA.
Annie Jacobsen
And if you look at their uniforms that they were wearing, and now that this you’ll be, “Oh.” You’ll see, there’s no nomenclature on them. They’re just meant to be completely untraceable. Were they to be shot down and captured, it’s like, “Wait, who are these guys? Oh, a bunch of rogue guys.” And this goes back the origin story of all that is in Vietnam with MACV-SOG and these cross-border operations that I chronicle in Surprise, Kill, Vanish, which still amaze me to this day. I mean, SOG missions, they called it suicide on the ground, because that’s what it was. And these guys had no identifiable. Nothing. I mean, they were essentially in pajamas. Even their weapons were specially designed by the CIA to have no serial numbers, no nothing. So if they were captured and they became POWs, I don’t know who these guys are.
And if you look at their uniforms that they were wearing, and now that this you’ll be, “Oh.” You’ll see, there’s no nomenclature on them. They’re just meant to be completely untraceable. Were they to be shot down and captured, it’s like, “Wait, who are these guys? Oh, a bunch of rogue guys.” And this goes back the origin story of all that is in Vietnam with MACV-SOG and these cross-border operations that I chronicle in Surprise, Kill, Vanish, which still amaze me to this day. I mean, SOG missions, they called it suicide on the ground, because that’s what it was. And these guys had no identifiable. Nothing. I mean, they were essentially in pajamas. Even their weapons were specially designed by the CIA to have no serial numbers, no nothing. So if they were captured and they became POWs, I don’t know who these guys are.
Lex Fridman
What do you think, and how much do they think at the highest levels of power about the ethics of assassination and about the role of that in geopolitics and military operations? To you maybe also, does assassination make sense as a good methodology of war?
What do you think, and how much do they think at the highest levels of power about the ethics of assassination and about the role of that in geopolitics and military operations? To you maybe also, does assassination make sense as a good methodology of war?
Annie Jacobsen
I mean, again, I try to remain agnostic on the policy part of it and just report the operator’s perspective, because this is what people do and this is what people are asked to do. And it depends on the individual. I mean, Billy Waugh went on a lot of those missions. I mean, the saying is like, “Oh, Billy Waugh, he killed more people than cancer.” Did Billy Waugh ever tell me about direct assassinations? No, because they’re all classified. Did he tell me about some failed ones? Yes. I’ll give you an example. It’s really interesting.
I mean, again, I try to remain agnostic on the policy part of it and just report the operator’s perspective, because this is what people do and this is what people are asked to do. And it depends on the individual. I mean, Billy Waugh went on a lot of those missions. I mean, the saying is like, “Oh, Billy Waugh, he killed more people than cancer.” Did Billy Waugh ever tell me about direct assassinations? No, because they’re all classified. Did he tell me about some failed ones? Yes. I’ll give you an example. It’s really interesting.
He would show me these PowerPoints that were just fantastic. Late in his life, he was constantly being asked to go up to Fort Bragg and lecture to the young soldiers, and everybody loved him. And he would drive all night to get there, and he would create these PowerPoints, and then he would show me the PowerPoints, all unclassified. But at one point, when Hugo Chavez was in power, Billy Waugh was kind of asked, that’s how it works, of if you had to think about doing something, what would it look like? Let’s just say hypothetically. So he took me through this PowerPoint that never happened, whereby he and a group of operators, agency operators were going to HALO jump in to the palace and grab Chavez and probably kill him because he wouldn’t allow himself to be captured. And by the way, HALO jumping, for those listeners who don’t know, high altitude, low opening.
So you jump out of an aircraft and you go down like a pencil until you’re really low to the deck, like a thousand feet. You pull your parachute cord, and that way you’re not picked up on radar and you’re also not traceable when you get to the ground because it’s so fast. Billy Waugh took the second HALO jump in history into a war theater in Laos during the Vietnam War. So he’s like this famous HALO jumper. So he and the team were going to go in grab Chavez, and he said to me a very interesting thing that was kind of a one moment in time where I saw a different side of Billy Waugh where he said, “I’m so glad we didn’t do that, even though I really wanted to at the time, because can you imagine that country’s problems, where it is now? Can you imagine how we would have been blamed?” And it was an interesting rare moment for Billy Waugh to comment on the bigger picture that you’re asking me about. I think pretty much the operators I know they just stick to the mission.
Lex Fridman
So on the technical difficulty of those missions, just your big sense, how hard is it to assassinate a target on the soil of that nation?
So on the technical difficulty of those missions, just your big sense, how hard is it to assassinate a target on the soil of that nation?
Annie Jacobsen
I suppose that just depends. Here’s another insightful thing Billy Waugh said to me, and I’m answering the question around because I don’t know, because again, I never had anyone say to me, “Here’s how it went down,” because you can’t. First of all, those are classified, so I’m never going to receive classified information. I did hear a lot about reconnaissance missions when people would be in charge of, you have to be able to what’s called make book on the target before, and making book on the target means photographing them then that gets run up the chain of command to make sure this is really Imad Mughniyeh we’re about to kill.
I suppose that just depends. Here’s another insightful thing Billy Waugh said to me, and I’m answering the question around because I don’t know, because again, I never had anyone say to me, “Here’s how it went down,” because you can’t. First of all, those are classified, so I’m never going to receive classified information. I did hear a lot about reconnaissance missions when people would be in charge of, you have to be able to what’s called make book on the target before, and making book on the target means photographing them then that gets run up the chain of command to make sure this is really Imad Mughniyeh we’re about to kill.
But I once asked Billy when I was trying to get the question and he wouldn’t answer it, and I said, so there’s another person in my book named Rick Proto, who’s also a legendary agency guy, and so he’s like 20 years younger than Billy. And I said, “Billy, if you and Rick had to kill each other, who would win?” I was trying to imagine this hypothetical, how would that work? Who would win? And I posed the question to each of them, and of course each of them said me, then I went back to them and Billy said, “Let me tell you how I would win.” And he said, ” I’d cheat. I’d show up before the duel.”
Annie Jacobsen
I’d cheat. I’d show up before the dual, and I’d kill him.
I’d cheat. I’d show up before the dual, and I’d kill him.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I have a lot of friends who were Navy SEALs. This is just guy conversation.
Yeah. I have a lot of friends who were Navy SEALs. This is just guy conversation.
Annie Jacobsen
Well, you would be amazed at what the women do. Let me just tell you that. Women are part of the Special Activities Division, a big part of it.
Well, you would be amazed at what the women do. Let me just tell you that. Women are part of the Special Activities Division, a big part of it.
Lex Fridman
Can you comment on that?
Can you comment on that?
Annie Jacobsen
I can. Women can get a hell of a lot closer to a target. And I mean that literally.
I can. Women can get a hell of a lot closer to a target. And I mean that literally.
Lex Fridman
The special operations, is this part of the CIA?
The special operations, is this part of the CIA?
Annie Jacobsen
The Special Activities Division, now it’s called the Special Activity Center. But originally that’s the umbrella agency that has the different paramilitary organizations under it. So the most lethal one is Ground Branch. And that’s what I reported on in Surprise, Kill, Vanish. And its origins go way back to the Guerrilla warfare corps that was started in 1947 for the president.
The Special Activities Division, now it’s called the Special Activity Center. But originally that’s the umbrella agency that has the different paramilitary organizations under it. So the most lethal one is Ground Branch. And that’s what I reported on in Surprise, Kill, Vanish. And its origins go way back to the Guerrilla warfare corps that was started in 1947 for the president.
Lex Fridman
So women are also a part of the alleged assassination?
So women are also a part of the alleged assassination?
Annie Jacobsen
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Lex Fridman
And you’re saying they can at times be more effective. I am just going to leave that pause there. The reason I ask of how difficult the assassinations are, with Bin Laden, it took a long time. So I guess the reconnaissance, the intelligence for finding the target. I imagine with Mossad, maybe this now the leadership of Hamas or the military branch of Hamas is much wanted from an assassination perspective. So to me as an outside observer, it seems like it’s more difficult than you would imagine. But perhaps that’s the intelligence aspect of it, not the actual assassination of locating the person.
And you’re saying they can at times be more effective. I am just going to leave that pause there. The reason I ask of how difficult the assassinations are, with Bin Laden, it took a long time. So I guess the reconnaissance, the intelligence for finding the target. I imagine with Mossad, maybe this now the leadership of Hamas or the military branch of Hamas is much wanted from an assassination perspective. So to me as an outside observer, it seems like it’s more difficult than you would imagine. But perhaps that’s the intelligence aspect of it, not the actual assassination of locating the person.
Annie Jacobsen
Well, I think it’s because mostly from what I understand, it’s a really dirty game and people are covering for people. And I’ll give you the example of Billy Waugh and Imad Mughniyeh, if I may. So Imad Mughniyeh was the most wanted terrorist in the world before Bin Laden. Hezbollah’s, chief of operations. And he was wanted by every, Mossad, jawn down. But no one could find him. He was missing for 20 years. There wasn’t even a photograph of him. And then he resurfaced. And of all places he resurfaced in Saudi Arabia, okay. “What?” That’s when I say it’s a dirty game. Hezbollah, Iran, Hezbollah Iran, enemies with Saudi Arabia. Why on earth was Imad Mughniyeh in Saudi Arabia? Well, that’s where he was. There was a Navy SEAL who was doing reconnaissance on him. This is according to Billy Waugh. And this is around 2005. So Billy’s in his ’80s at this point, late ’70s, ’80s.
Well, I think it’s because mostly from what I understand, it’s a really dirty game and people are covering for people. And I’ll give you the example of Billy Waugh and Imad Mughniyeh, if I may. So Imad Mughniyeh was the most wanted terrorist in the world before Bin Laden. Hezbollah’s, chief of operations. And he was wanted by every, Mossad, jawn down. But no one could find him. He was missing for 20 years. There wasn’t even a photograph of him. And then he resurfaced. And of all places he resurfaced in Saudi Arabia, okay. “What?” That’s when I say it’s a dirty game. Hezbollah, Iran, Hezbollah Iran, enemies with Saudi Arabia. Why on earth was Imad Mughniyeh in Saudi Arabia? Well, that’s where he was. There was a Navy SEAL who was doing reconnaissance on him. This is according to Billy Waugh. And this is around 2005. So Billy’s in his ’80s at this point, late ’70s, ’80s.
He gets word that the SEAL who has been tracking Mughniyeh to get photographs of him, to give the photographs to Mossad and CIA so they can do a joint operation to kill him, which they did with a car bomb in Damascus. That’s the end of the story. But how we got there was, the CIA needed confirmation. You can’t kill the wrong person. So the SEAL panicked according to Billy Waugh and was just like, “I’m out of here. This is too dangerous and I do not want to wind up in a Saudi prison.” So who do you send in, Billy Waugh? He shows up, he’s there for 24 hours. He knows where Mughniyeh lives from the SEAL. He positions himself in a cafe across the street which is run by Sudanese men. And of course Waugh speaks some Sudanese because he operated in Sudan. And he’s shooting the shit with him by his own words. He had the most foul mouth that was just absolutely delightful to listen to.
And then in between him and Mughniyeh’s house is a dumpster. And Billy Waugh being Billy Waugh, who will go to any lengths to do the job, decides to conduct reconnaissance from inside the dumpster. And that is where he is when he takes the picture of Imad Mughniyeh living so comfortably in Saudi. That Mughniyeh according to Billy, came out of his apartment building with dry cleaner plastic bag hangers over his shoulder. That’s how comfortable he lived there. It was his neighborhood. Click, click, click, Billy Waugh takes the photographs, runs them to the CIA headquarters in Saudi at the embassy. Oh my God, it’s Mughniyeh. Get the hell out of here. He gets to the airport, he leaves. Those photographs get sent to the agency, and then they do the operation with Mossad and Mughniyeh is dead. Now the truth about that being a co CIA mission was not reported for many years after the fact. Mossad took credit as the CIA often likes to just give other people credit. They just want the job done.
Lex Fridman
Well, speaking of Mossad, in your understanding of all the intelligence agencies, what are the strengths and weaknesses of the different intelligence agencies out there? CIA and Mossad, MI6, SVR and FSB and Chinese intelligence, all this stuff. Is there some interesting differences, insights that you have from all of your studying FCIA?
Well, speaking of Mossad, in your understanding of all the intelligence agencies, what are the strengths and weaknesses of the different intelligence agencies out there? CIA and Mossad, MI6, SVR and FSB and Chinese intelligence, all this stuff. Is there some interesting differences, insights that you have from all of your studying FCIA?
Annie Jacobsen
That’s a really interesting question. I don’t know. And here’s why. It’s because I’ve never interviewed any intelligence officer with those other agencies. I’ve interviewed a couple of people with Shin Bet in Israel. But until I speak to an actual source whose job it was, I don’t know. So the information that I’m getting is based on perception of others which one would think would be deeply clouded by the idea that America is the greatest. We’re better than them.
That’s a really interesting question. I don’t know. And here’s why. It’s because I’ve never interviewed any intelligence officer with those other agencies. I’ve interviewed a couple of people with Shin Bet in Israel. But until I speak to an actual source whose job it was, I don’t know. So the information that I’m getting is based on perception of others which one would think would be deeply clouded by the idea that America is the greatest. We’re better than them.
Lex Fridman
Yes. Well, actually the fascinating thing is because you’ve spoken to a lot of people about the CIA. How do you know they’re telling the truth? And this actually probably applies generally to your interviews with very secretive people. How do you get past the bullshit?
Yes. Well, actually the fascinating thing is because you’ve spoken to a lot of people about the CIA. How do you know they’re telling the truth? And this actually probably applies generally to your interviews with very secretive people. How do you get past the bullshit?
Annie Jacobsen
Well, that’s just like multiple sourcing. So you find the story out and then you go to the national archives and you find the operation and then you learn all about this, and then you interview other people who were there and you put the story together to the best of your ability and you make very specific choices with “so-and-so said,” said so-and-so. And very rarely do I report on a single source as I did in the end of Area 51. And then it says essentially, look dear reader, this is what the source told me. I have no way of corroborating it. This is legit and here it is. So that’s an area to make your reader comfortable with the information that they’re being given. And then in all of my books, whether there are three or 400 pages, there’s always 100 pages of notes at the end. So you can see all the sourcing and you can begin to get an understanding of how journalism in the national security world works.
Well, that’s just like multiple sourcing. So you find the story out and then you go to the national archives and you find the operation and then you learn all about this, and then you interview other people who were there and you put the story together to the best of your ability and you make very specific choices with “so-and-so said,” said so-and-so. And very rarely do I report on a single source as I did in the end of Area 51. And then it says essentially, look dear reader, this is what the source told me. I have no way of corroborating it. This is legit and here it is. So that’s an area to make your reader comfortable with the information that they’re being given. And then in all of my books, whether there are three or 400 pages, there’s always 100 pages of notes at the end. So you can see all the sourcing and you can begin to get an understanding of how journalism in the national security world works.
And also great opportunity for me to say, I’m often standing on the shoulders of journalists before me who did an incredible job digging into something and being able to report what they knew. Often the books are 10, 20, 30 years old, and so much more has come to light since.
Navalny
Lex Fridman
And I also would just like to say that I appreciate that you said, “Great question, I don’t know.” Not enough people say I don’t know and that’s a sign of a great journalist. But speaking about things you might not know about, let me ask you about something going on currently. So recently Alexei Navalny died in prison, perhaps was killed in prison. What’s your sense from looking at it? Do you think he died of natural causes in prison? Do you think it’s possible he was assassinated? Russia, Ukraine, Mossad, CIA, whoever has interest in this particular war.
And I also would just like to say that I appreciate that you said, “Great question, I don’t know.” Not enough people say I don’t know and that’s a sign of a great journalist. But speaking about things you might not know about, let me ask you about something going on currently. So recently Alexei Navalny died in prison, perhaps was killed in prison. What’s your sense from looking at it? Do you think he died of natural causes in prison? Do you think it’s possible he was assassinated? Russia, Ukraine, Mossad, CIA, whoever has interest in this particular war.
Annie Jacobsen
For that, I look directly to the historical record. Having written about Russian assassination campaigns and programs since the earliest days of the Cold War. And Russia has a long history of assassinating, murdering dissidents. And in Surprise, Kill, Vanish, I tell the story of an actual KGB assassin named Khokhlov who knocked on the door of the man he was assigned to kill. And by the way, this all comes from a book that Khokhlov wrote later. Because he defected to the United States. He knocks on the door and the guy answers the door. And instead of killing him, he has this moment of conscious of crisis or crisis of conscience and says, “I can’t kill you, even though that’s what I’m supposed to do.” And then sits down with the guy and together decides, okay, we’re going to defect. We’re going to let the Western intelligence agencies know what we’re doing here. And the CIA got involved.
For that, I look directly to the historical record. Having written about Russian assassination campaigns and programs since the earliest days of the Cold War. And Russia has a long history of assassinating, murdering dissidents. And in Surprise, Kill, Vanish, I tell the story of an actual KGB assassin named Khokhlov who knocked on the door of the man he was assigned to kill. And by the way, this all comes from a book that Khokhlov wrote later. Because he defected to the United States. He knocks on the door and the guy answers the door. And instead of killing him, he has this moment of conscious of crisis or crisis of conscience and says, “I can’t kill you, even though that’s what I’m supposed to do.” And then sits down with the guy and together decides, okay, we’re going to defect. We’re going to let the Western intelligence agencies know what we’re doing here. And the CIA got involved.
But Russian assassins were able to poison Khokhlov with polonium. What happens to him is insane and it’s a miracle he didn’t die, but he doesn’t. And then he defects to the West and he writes these books and he tells lots of incredible secrets about the Russian assassination programs and their poison labs and they’re really interesting. So to answer that question, I mean to my eye of course, I don’t know, but it certainly looks like Russia is acting in the same vein that it has always acted, taking care of dissidents that go against Mother Russia.
KGB
Lex Fridman
So in the style of KGB assassinations. Is there something you can comment on about the ways that KGB operates versus the CIA when we look at the history of the two organizations, the Cold War, after World War II and the leading up to today?
So in the style of KGB assassinations. Is there something you can comment on about the ways that KGB operates versus the CIA when we look at the history of the two organizations, the Cold War, after World War II and the leading up to today?
Annie Jacobsen
I mean, my feeling on that is always that there’s a thread somewhere in declassified documentation about these programs of America working to maintain assemblance of democratic ideals, however surprising that may be. In other words, always trying to, I don’t want to say fight fair because killing people isn’t fair, but versus a certain ruthlessness, a real sinister totalitarian type ruthlessness certainly from Soviet Russia. I’m far less familiar with modern day Russian assassination activities, although we certainly know on the record that they exist. Some people have done great reporting on that. But there seems to be almost a sadism about the Russian programs that I personally have not seen in the American programs.
I mean, my feeling on that is always that there’s a thread somewhere in declassified documentation about these programs of America working to maintain assemblance of democratic ideals, however surprising that may be. In other words, always trying to, I don’t want to say fight fair because killing people isn’t fair, but versus a certain ruthlessness, a real sinister totalitarian type ruthlessness certainly from Soviet Russia. I’m far less familiar with modern day Russian assassination activities, although we certainly know on the record that they exist. Some people have done great reporting on that. But there seems to be almost a sadism about the Russian programs that I personally have not seen in the American programs.
Lex Fridman
What about on the surveillance side? It seems like America’s pretty good at mass surveillance, or at least has been revealed through NSA and all this reporting and leaks and whistleblowers. Can you comment to the degree to how much surveillance is done by the US government internally and externally?
What about on the surveillance side? It seems like America’s pretty good at mass surveillance, or at least has been revealed through NSA and all this reporting and leaks and whistleblowers. Can you comment to the degree to how much surveillance is done by the US government internally and externally?
Annie Jacobsen
If you’d asked me five years ago, I would’ve a very different answer. Because first of all, they’re looking for a needle in the haystack. They’re looking for the Bin Laden and they can’t find the needle in the haystack, but they continue to create the haystack and survey the haystack. I’m I right?
If you’d asked me five years ago, I would’ve a very different answer. Because first of all, they’re looking for a needle in the haystack. They’re looking for the Bin Laden and they can’t find the needle in the haystack, but they continue to create the haystack and survey the haystack. I’m I right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Annie Jacobsen
Okay. But the real problem, what has happened, and I write about this in my book, First Platoon, which is about a group of young soldiers who goes to Afghanistan and unwittingly becomes part of the defense department’s efforts to capture biometrics on 85% of the population of Afghanistan. Which by the way, China then emulated in their own biometric surveillance program. And I think this is a terrible idea. But what has happened, these biometric systems that have been created and biometrics are of course fingerprints, facial images, DNA and iris scans that allow you to tag, track and locate people.
Okay. But the real problem, what has happened, and I write about this in my book, First Platoon, which is about a group of young soldiers who goes to Afghanistan and unwittingly becomes part of the defense department’s efforts to capture biometrics on 85% of the population of Afghanistan. Which by the way, China then emulated in their own biometric surveillance program. And I think this is a terrible idea. But what has happened, these biometric systems that have been created and biometrics are of course fingerprints, facial images, DNA and iris scans that allow you to tag, track and locate people.
And what has happened in the five years since this question was first on everybody’s minds about NSA surveillance is that the civilian sector companies have essentially done all the defense department’s biometric surveillance job for them by all of us sharing our facially recognizable images on Instagram and Facebook and everywhere else, X, by sharing information, by writing up narratives about ourselves. This information has become part of the database. Five years ago when I was reporting First Platoon, I was interviewing the police chief of El Segundo, which is like on the outskirts of LA. It’s right near the airport. And why it’s important is because it’s like defense contractor haven. So they have massive surveillance. And Chief Whalen, when I posed this question to him, he said to me, “Annie, let me show you something.” And he had Clearwater AI, the recognition software on his phone. And this was still when it was like quasi not supposed to, you have that for law enforcement. And he said, “I want you to go down the block and I want you to just turn the corner and come back toward me.” Which I did. And he just didn’t even hold up his phone. He just looked at his hand and his phone was on me. And he went back down and it was like the tiniest movement. And when I came back to him, he went like this and he showed me, there I was. Everything about me. Facts and figures and all images. And he knew who I was before I even got to him. So is that a good thing or a bad thing? I mean, we could have another three hour conversation about that alone.
Lex Fridman
So you’re saying more and more, you don’t need NSA where we’re giving over the data ourselves publicly or semi publicly.
So you’re saying more and more, you don’t need NSA where we’re giving over the data ourselves publicly or semi publicly.
Annie Jacobsen
Yeah. During the war on terror, people were just incensed to learn that there is a drone that’s flying at something like 20,000 feet. It’s called ARGUS-IS. And it can capture the… It’s not a license plate. It’s like it can basically capture what’s written on a golf ball from 17,000 feet, 20,000 feet up. And people went crazy over this like, “Oh my god, it’s Big Brother.” Well, one of the lead engineers on that, Pat Billkin is someone I talk to regularly because we talk about surveillance a lot because he thinks about it a lot because he has kids now. And he has given so much thoughtful, really thinks about this issue because he believes, just like you stated, that what we are turning over about ourselves actually exceeds anything that ARGUS-IS could do from above because we’re doing it willfully.
Yeah. During the war on terror, people were just incensed to learn that there is a drone that’s flying at something like 20,000 feet. It’s called ARGUS-IS. And it can capture the… It’s not a license plate. It’s like it can basically capture what’s written on a golf ball from 17,000 feet, 20,000 feet up. And people went crazy over this like, “Oh my god, it’s Big Brother.” Well, one of the lead engineers on that, Pat Billkin is someone I talk to regularly because we talk about surveillance a lot because he thinks about it a lot because he has kids now. And he has given so much thoughtful, really thinks about this issue because he believes, just like you stated, that what we are turning over about ourselves actually exceeds anything that ARGUS-IS could do from above because we’re doing it willfully.
So what it’s doing is it’s creating an ability for, if someone wants to know about you, if someone, let’s say in government, wants to know about Lex Fridman, they can find out everything about you. And then that gets used for tagging, tracking and ultimately. In the war theater it was called find, fix, finish. Well, what do you think the finish is in that statement?
Lex Fridman
It’s not pleasant.
It’s not pleasant.
Annie Jacobsen
It’s called a drone strike. Find, find him with the biometric, fix him, meaning fix his position. We know he’s moving in a car. That’s him. Finish him. Call it in, drone strike. Boom.
It’s called a drone strike. Find, find him with the biometric, fix him, meaning fix his position. We know he’s moving in a car. That’s him. Finish him. Call it in, drone strike. Boom.
Hitler and the atomic bomb
Lex Fridman
If we could return to nuclear war, you’ve briefly mentioned that a lot of things go back to the Third Reich and Hitler. If we go back to World War II, we look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the dropping of the two bombs. I would love to get your opinion on whether we should or shouldn’t have done that. And also to get your opinion on what would’ve happened if Hitler and Germany built the bomb first. Do you think it was possible he could have built the bomb first?
If we could return to nuclear war, you’ve briefly mentioned that a lot of things go back to the Third Reich and Hitler. If we go back to World War II, we look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the dropping of the two bombs. I would love to get your opinion on whether we should or shouldn’t have done that. And also to get your opinion on what would’ve happened if Hitler and Germany built the bomb first. Do you think it was possible he could have built the bomb first?
Annie Jacobsen
In my researching Third Reich weapons for Operation Paperclip, because of course we got a lot of those scientists, after.
In my researching Third Reich weapons for Operation Paperclip, because of course we got a lot of those scientists, after.
Lex Fridman
Which is another great book in a terrifyingly complicated operation.
Which is another great book in a terrifyingly complicated operation.
Annie Jacobsen
Yes. At what point do the ends justify the means? But in looking at those programs, and we acquired Hitler’s favorite weapons designers. And I’m talking about weapons of mass destruction like chemical weapons and biological weapons. But of course, America was ahead in the nuclear program. And an interesting detail reading Albert Speer’s memoirs. Was Speer referring to a conversation he had with Hitler where Hitler said, “No, I don’t want to do that. That’s Jewish science.” So because of Hitler’s own racial ethnic prejudices, they didn’t develop the bomb. As far as should we have dropped the bombs on Hiroshima, I’ve interviewed all kinds of people with different opinions, most of them that had ended the war. The best interview and most meaningful perhaps that I ever did was with Alfred O’Donnell, who was a participant in the Battle of Okinawa, which was like this insane. Just to read stories about Okinawa, it makes your hair stand on end.
Yes. At what point do the ends justify the means? But in looking at those programs, and we acquired Hitler’s favorite weapons designers. And I’m talking about weapons of mass destruction like chemical weapons and biological weapons. But of course, America was ahead in the nuclear program. And an interesting detail reading Albert Speer’s memoirs. Was Speer referring to a conversation he had with Hitler where Hitler said, “No, I don’t want to do that. That’s Jewish science.” So because of Hitler’s own racial ethnic prejudices, they didn’t develop the bomb. As far as should we have dropped the bombs on Hiroshima, I’ve interviewed all kinds of people with different opinions, most of them that had ended the war. The best interview and most meaningful perhaps that I ever did was with Alfred O’Donnell, who was a participant in the Battle of Okinawa, which was like this insane. Just to read stories about Okinawa, it makes your hair stand on end.
And O’Donnell like so many others, was slated to invade mainland Japan, to his almost certain death. So somebody like that, it makes sense right from the get go why he would be pro nuclear weapons. It saved his own personal life and it saved everyone that he knew that he was fighting with. And it ended the war.
Lex Fridman
Do you think it sent a signal? Like without that we wouldn’t have known perhaps about the power of the weapons. So in the long arc of that history, 70 years plus, it is the reason why deterrence has worked so far.
Do you think it sent a signal? Like without that we wouldn’t have known perhaps about the power of the weapons. So in the long arc of that history, 70 years plus, it is the reason why deterrence has worked so far.
Annie Jacobsen
Yes. That’s an interesting thought. My thought goes to this idea of more. That everybody always wants more. It’s a very dangerous… It’s like more power, literally, just more power. And what is more confounding to me beyond the fact that we dropped two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the war ended is that this decision was then made to develop the thermonuclear bomb. A force that is such… The degree of magnitude of that power is mind-boggling. I mean even projects within the Manhattan Project defined thermonuclear weapon, the thermonuclear weapon as the evil thing. It was evil. It’s a weapon of genocide. Atomic weapons destroy cities, thermonuclear weapons destroy civilizations.
Yes. That’s an interesting thought. My thought goes to this idea of more. That everybody always wants more. It’s a very dangerous… It’s like more power, literally, just more power. And what is more confounding to me beyond the fact that we dropped two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the war ended is that this decision was then made to develop the thermonuclear bomb. A force that is such… The degree of magnitude of that power is mind-boggling. I mean even projects within the Manhattan Project defined thermonuclear weapon, the thermonuclear weapon as the evil thing. It was evil. It’s a weapon of genocide. Atomic weapons destroy cities, thermonuclear weapons destroy civilizations.
War and human nature
Lex Fridman
You open the book with a Churchill quote, ” The story of the human race is war. Except for brief and precarious interludes there has never been peace in the world. And before history began, murders strife was universal and unending.” Do you think there will always be war? Do you think that there is some deep human way in which we’re tending to this global war eternally?
You open the book with a Churchill quote, ” The story of the human race is war. Except for brief and precarious interludes there has never been peace in the world. And before history began, murders strife was universal and unending.” Do you think there will always be war? Do you think that there is some deep human way in which we’re tending to this global war eternally?
Annie Jacobsen
Well, the optimistic answer of that would be that we could evolve beyond that. Because certainly if we look at our ancestors, they had not developed their consciousness as far as we have to be able to build the tools that we have. So the hopeful answer is we will evolve beyond this brute force, kill the other guy attitude. Certainly these are questions that will become more obvious over time. I just want to play my little part in this world that I live in as the storyteller who brings information to people so that they can have these questions with themselves, with their friends, with their families. And I think in asking that very question, what you’re really saying is, why don’t we evolve beyond war fighting?
Well, the optimistic answer of that would be that we could evolve beyond that. Because certainly if we look at our ancestors, they had not developed their consciousness as far as we have to be able to build the tools that we have. So the hopeful answer is we will evolve beyond this brute force, kill the other guy attitude. Certainly these are questions that will become more obvious over time. I just want to play my little part in this world that I live in as the storyteller who brings information to people so that they can have these questions with themselves, with their friends, with their families. And I think in asking that very question, what you’re really saying is, why don’t we evolve beyond war fighting?
Lex Fridman
It is very possible. And your book is such a stark and powerful reminder that human civilization, as we know it ends in this century. It’s a good motivator to get our shit together.
It is very possible. And your book is such a stark and powerful reminder that human civilization, as we know it ends in this century. It’s a good motivator to get our shit together.
Annie Jacobsen
But aren’t you really saying human civilization could end, not it ends?
But aren’t you really saying human civilization could end, not it ends?
Lex Fridman
Could end.
Could end.
Annie Jacobsen
Could end.
Could end.
Lex Fridman
But the power of our weapons is growing rapidly.
But the power of our weapons is growing rapidly.
Annie Jacobsen
As they say, it’s time to come back from the brink. And it’s time to have that discussion while we’re still talking.
As they say, it’s time to come back from the brink. And it’s time to have that discussion while we’re still talking.
Lex Fridman
And there’s another complexity sneaking up into the picture in the form of artificial intelligence and in cyber war, but also in hot war, the use of autonomous weapons. All of it starts becoming super complicated as we delegate some of these decisions about war, including nuclear war to more and more autonomy and artificial intelligence systems, is going to be a very interesting century. Do you just zoom out a little bit, hope that we become a multi-planetary species?
And there’s another complexity sneaking up into the picture in the form of artificial intelligence and in cyber war, but also in hot war, the use of autonomous weapons. All of it starts becoming super complicated as we delegate some of these decisions about war, including nuclear war to more and more autonomy and artificial intelligence systems, is going to be a very interesting century. Do you just zoom out a little bit, hope that we become a multi-planetary species?
Annie Jacobsen
I’m all for adventure.
I’m all for adventure.
Lex Fridman
And I too while am for adventure, I’m all for backups in all forms. So I hope that human start a civilization on Mars and beyond out in space. And if you zoom on across all of it, what gives you hope about human civilization, about this whole thing we have going on here?
And I too while am for adventure, I’m all for backups in all forms. So I hope that human start a civilization on Mars and beyond out in space. And if you zoom on across all of it, what gives you hope about human civilization, about this whole thing we have going on here?
Hope
Annie Jacobsen
I mean, I am a fundamentally optimistic person. I must have come out of the shoot that way. Because I just am. Even though I write about really grim things, I get inspired by them because I do always believe in evolution. I also have the greatest family ever. Two kids, Jet and Finley, shout out to them. They’re Lex Fridman fans.
I mean, I am a fundamentally optimistic person. I must have come out of the shoot that way. Because I just am. Even though I write about really grim things, I get inspired by them because I do always believe in evolution. I also have the greatest family ever. Two kids, Jet and Finley, shout out to them. They’re Lex Fridman fans.
Lex Fridman
Oh yeah, oh you guys.
Oh yeah, oh you guys.
Annie Jacobsen
And my husband. So what inspires me is this idea of legacy. I think that you always want to have your eye on being a good example to the best that you can and passing on what you know and believing in the next generation. And again, that’s a sentiment echoed by all these cold warriors I’ve been talking to because they also share that idea that, wow, look at what we have done as a civilization and look where we’re going. Whether it’s exoplanetary travel or AI. It’s just that the human factor of the desire to fight, the desire to have conflict, needs to be reconfigured, because with all these new technologies that we have, the peril is growing at an accelerating pace, perhaps faster than the average human can keep up with.
And my husband. So what inspires me is this idea of legacy. I think that you always want to have your eye on being a good example to the best that you can and passing on what you know and believing in the next generation. And again, that’s a sentiment echoed by all these cold warriors I’ve been talking to because they also share that idea that, wow, look at what we have done as a civilization and look where we’re going. Whether it’s exoplanetary travel or AI. It’s just that the human factor of the desire to fight, the desire to have conflict, needs to be reconfigured, because with all these new technologies that we have, the peril is growing at an accelerating pace, perhaps faster than the average human can keep up with.
Lex Fridman
Well Annie, thank you for being a wonderful example of a great journalist, a great writer, a great human being. And I’m a big fan of yours. It’s a huge honor to meet you, to talk with today. So thank you so much for talking today.
Well Annie, thank you for being a wonderful example of a great journalist, a great writer, a great human being. And I’m a big fan of yours. It’s a huge honor to meet you, to talk with today. So thank you so much for talking today.
Annie Jacobsen
Thank you for having me.
Thank you for having me.
Lex Fridman
Thank you for listening to this conversation with Annie Jacobsen. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you some words from John F. Kennedy. “The very word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society. And we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, the secret oaths, and the secret proceedings.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thank you for listening to this conversation with Annie Jacobsen. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you some words from John F. Kennedy. “The very word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society. And we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, the secret oaths, and the secret proceedings.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Sam Altman: OpenAI, GPT-5, Sora, Board Saga, Elon Musk, Ilya, Power & AGI | Lex Fridman Podcast #419
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #419 with Sam Altman 2.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
The following is a conversation with Sam Altman, his second time on the podcast. He is the CEO of OpenAI, the company behind GPT-4, ChaTGPT, Sora, and perhaps one day the very company that will build AGI. This is The Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Sam Altman.
Take me through the OpenAI board saga that started on Thursday, November 16th, maybe Friday, November 17th for you.
So those were decided honestly without… You do that on the battlefield. You don’t have time to design a rigorous process then. For new board members since, and new board members we’ll add going forward, we have some criteria that we think are important for the board to have, different expertise that we want the board to have. Unlike hiring an executive where you need them to do one role well, the board needs to do a whole role of governance and thoughtfulness well, and so, one thing that Brett says which I really like is that we want to hire board members in slates, not as individuals one at a time. And thinking about a group of people that will bring nonprofit expertise, expertise at running companies, good legal and governance expertise, that’s what we’ve tried to optimize for.
And I was like, well, my current job at OpenAI is, or it was, to run a decently sized company at this point. And the thing I’d always liked the most was just getting to work with the researchers. And I was like, yeah, I can just go do a very focused AGI research effort. And I got excited about that. Didn’t even occur to me at the time possibly that this was all going to get undone. This was Friday afternoon.
We kept being told, all right, we’re almost done. We’re almost done. We just need a little bit more time. And it was this very confusing state. And then Sunday evening when, again, every few hours I expected that we were going to be done and we’re going to figure out a way for me to return and things to go back to how they were. The board then appointed a new interim CEO, and then I was like, that feels really bad. That was the low point of the whole thing. I’ll tell you something. It felt very painful, but I felt a lot of love that whole weekend. Other than that one moment Sunday night, I would not characterize my emotions as anger or hate, but I felt a lot of love from people, towards people. It was painful, but the dominant emotion of the weekend was love, not hate.
And then it became clear that we were going to need to do different things and also have huge amounts more capital. So we said, “Okay, well, the structure doesn’t quite work for that. How do we patch the structure?” And then you patch it again and patch it again and you end up with something that does look eyebrow-raising, to say the least. But we got here gradually with, I think, reasonable decisions at each point along the way. And it doesn’t mean I wouldn’t do it totally differently if we could go back now with an Oracle, but you don’t get the Oracle at the time. But anyway, in terms of what Elon’s real motivations here are, I don’t know.
So speaking of cool shit, Sora. There’s like a million questions I could ask. First of all, it’s amazing. It truly is amazing on a product level but also just on a philosophical level. So let me just technical/philosophical ask, what do you think it understands about the world more or less than GPT-4 for example? The world model when you train on these patches versus language tokens.
I remember when I started first watching Sora videos and I would see a person walk in front of something for a few seconds and occlude it and then walk away and the same thing was still there. I was like, “Oh, this is pretty good.” Or there’s examples where the underlying physics looks so well represented over a lot of steps in a sequence, it’s like, “|Oh, this is quite impressive.” But fundamentally, these models are just getting better and that will keep happening. If you look at the trajectory from DALL·E 1 to 2 to 3 to Sora, there are a lot of people that were dunked on each version saying it can’t do this, it can’t do that and look at it now.
Listen, I hate being in front of the camera. If I can figure out a way to not be in front of the camera, I would love it. Unfortunately, it’ll take a while. That generating faces, it is getting there, but generating faces in video format is tricky when it’s specific people versus generic people.
Let me ask you about GPT-4. There’s so many questions. First of all, also amazing. Looking back, it’ll probably be this kind of historic pivotal moment with 3, 5 and 4 which ChatGPT.
One of the other things that you can see a very small glimpse of is when I can help on longer horizon tasks, break down something in multiple steps, maybe execute some of those steps, search the internet, write code, whatever, put that together. When that works, which is not very often, it’s very magical.
You mentioned this collaboration. I’m not sure where the magic is, if it’s in here or if it’s in there or if it’s somewhere in between. I’m not sure. But one of the things that concerns me for knowledge task when I start with GPT is I’ll usually have to do fact checking after, like check that it didn’t come up with fake stuff. How do you figure that out that GPT can come up with fake stuff that sounds really convincing? So how do you ground it in truth?
I think that’s really good. But the fact that people like you and others say you still feel like there are these leaps makes me think that maybe we should be doing our releasing even more iteratively. And I don’t know what that would mean, I don’t have an answer ready to go, but our goal is not to have shock updates to the world. The opposite.
But compute is different. Intelligence is going to be more like energy or something like that, where the only thing that I think makes sense to talk about is, at price X, the world will use this much compute, and at price Y, the world will use this much compute. Because if it’s really cheap, I’ll have it reading my email all day, giving me suggestions about what I maybe should think about or work on, and trying to cure cancer, and if it’s really expensive, maybe I’ll only use it, or we’ll only use it, to try to cure cancer.
So I think the world is going to want a tremendous amount of compute. And there’s a lot of parts of that that are hard. Energy is the hardest part, building data centers is also hard, the supply chain is hard, and then of course, fabricating enough chips is hard. But this seems to be where things are going. We’re going to want an amount of compute that’s just hard to reason about right now.
But I don’t think it’s that interesting to say, “How do we go do a better job of giving you 10 ranked webpages to look at than what Google does?” Maybe it’s really interesting to go say, “How do we help you get the answer or the information you need? How do we help create that in some cases, synthesize that in others, or point you to it in yet others?” But a lot of people have tried to just make a better search engine than Google and it is a hard technical problem, it is a hard branding problem, it is a hard ecosystem problem. I don’t think the world needs another copy of Google.
And I don’t know, we have a very simple business model and I like it, and I know that I’m not the product. I know I’m paying and that’s how the business model works. And when I go use Twitter or Facebook or Google or any other great product but ad-supported great product, I don’t love that, and I think it gets worse, not better, in a world with AI.
Let me ask you about safety, but also bias, and safety in the short term, safety in the long term. The Gemini 1.5 came out recently, there’s a lot of drama around it, speaking of theatrical things, and it generated Black Nazis and Black Founding Fathers. I think fair to say it was a bit on the ultra-woke side. So that’s a concern for people, if there is a human layer within companies that modifies the safety or the harm caused by a model, that it would introduce a lot of bias that fits sort of an ideological lean within a company. How do you deal with that?
Now again, I feel like I can completely defend the specifics here, and I think most people would agree with that, but it does make it harder for me to look you in the eye and say, “Hey, the board can just fire me.” I continue to not want super-voting control over OpenAI. I never have. Never have had it, never wanted it. Even after all this craziness, I still don’t want it. I continue to think that no company should be making these decisions, and that we really need governments to put rules of the road in place.
And I realize that that means people like Marc Andreessen or whatever will claim I’m going for regulatory capture, and I’m just willing to be misunderstood there. It’s not true. And I think in the fullness of time, it’ll get proven out why this is important. But I think I have made plenty of bad decisions for OpenAI along the way, and a lot of good ones, and I’m proud of the track record overall. But I don’t think any one person should, and I don’t think any one person will. I think it’s just too big of a thing now, and it’s happening throughout society in a good and healthy way. But I don’t think any one person should be in control of an AGI, or this whole movement towards AGI. And I don’t think that’s what’s happening.
And then I used to, I think, even capitalize my tweets because I was trying to sound professional or something. I haven’t capitalized my private DMs or whatever in a long time. And then slowly, stuff like shorter-form, less formal stuff has slowly drifted to closer and closer to how I would text my friends. If I pull up a Word document and I’m writing a strategy memo for the company or something, I always capitalize that. If I’m writing a long, more formal message, I always use capitalization there, too. So I still remember how to do it. But even that may fade out. I don’t know. But I never spend time thinking about this, so I don’t have a ready-made-
And you can come up with lots of other examples, but I think this idea that the lowly square root operator can offer such a profound insight and a new realm of knowledge applies in a lot of ways. And I think there are a lot of those operators for why people may think that any version that they like of the simulation hypothesis is maybe more likely than they thought before. But for me, the fact that Sora worked is not in the top five.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 1:05 – OpenAI board saga
- 18:31 – Ilya Sutskever
- 24:40 – Elon Musk lawsuit
- 34:32 – Sora
- 44:23 – GPT-4
- 55:32 – Memory & privacy
- 1:02:36 – Q*
- 1:06:12 – GPT-5
- 1:09:27 – $7 trillion of compute
- 1:17:35 – Google and Gemini
- 1:28:40 – Leap to GPT-5
- 1:32:24 – AGI
- 1:50:57 – Aliens
Introduction
Sam Altman
I think compute is going to be the currency of the future. I think it’ll be maybe the most precious commodity in the world. I expect that by the end of this decade, and possibly somewhat sooner than that, we will have quite capable systems that we look at and say, “Wow, that’s really remarkable.” The road to AGI should be a giant power struggle. I expect that to be the case.
I think compute is going to be the currency of the future. I think it’ll be maybe the most precious commodity in the world. I expect that by the end of this decade, and possibly somewhat sooner than that, we will have quite capable systems that we look at and say, “Wow, that’s really remarkable.” The road to AGI should be a giant power struggle. I expect that to be the case.
Lex Fridman
Whoever builds AGI first gets a lot of power. Do you trust yourself with that much power?
Whoever builds AGI first gets a lot of power. Do you trust yourself with that much power?
The following is a conversation with Sam Altman, his second time on the podcast. He is the CEO of OpenAI, the company behind GPT-4, ChaTGPT, Sora, and perhaps one day the very company that will build AGI. This is The Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Sam Altman.
OpenAI board saga
Take me through the OpenAI board saga that started on Thursday, November 16th, maybe Friday, November 17th for you.
Sam Altman
That was definitely the most painful professional experience of my life, and chaotic and shameful and upsetting and a bunch of other negative things. There were great things about it too, and I wish it had not been in such an adrenaline rush that I wasn’t able to stop and appreciate them at the time. But I came across this old tweet of mine or this tweet of mine from that time period. It was like going your own eulogy, watching people say all these great things about you, and just unbelievable support from people I love and care about. That was really nice, really nice. That whole weekend, with one big exception, I felt like a great deal of love and very little hate, even though it felt like I have no idea what’s happening and what’s going to happen here and this feels really bad. And there were definitely times I thought it was going to be one of the worst things to ever happen for AI safety. Well, I also think I’m happy that it happened relatively early. I thought at some point between when OpenAI started and when we created AGI, there was going to be something crazy and explosive that happened, but there may be more crazy and explosive things still to happen. It still, I think, helped us build up some resilience and be ready for more challenges in the future.
That was definitely the most painful professional experience of my life, and chaotic and shameful and upsetting and a bunch of other negative things. There were great things about it too, and I wish it had not been in such an adrenaline rush that I wasn’t able to stop and appreciate them at the time. But I came across this old tweet of mine or this tweet of mine from that time period. It was like going your own eulogy, watching people say all these great things about you, and just unbelievable support from people I love and care about. That was really nice, really nice. That whole weekend, with one big exception, I felt like a great deal of love and very little hate, even though it felt like I have no idea what’s happening and what’s going to happen here and this feels really bad. And there were definitely times I thought it was going to be one of the worst things to ever happen for AI safety. Well, I also think I’m happy that it happened relatively early. I thought at some point between when OpenAI started and when we created AGI, there was going to be something crazy and explosive that happened, but there may be more crazy and explosive things still to happen. It still, I think, helped us build up some resilience and be ready for more challenges in the future.
Lex Fridman
But the thing you had a sense that you would experience is some kind of power struggle?
But the thing you had a sense that you would experience is some kind of power struggle?
Sam Altman
The road to AGI should be a giant power struggle. The world should… Well, not should. I expect that to be the case.
The road to AGI should be a giant power struggle. The world should… Well, not should. I expect that to be the case.
Lex Fridman
And so you have to go through that, like you said, iterate as often as possible in figuring out how to have a board structure, how to have organization, how to have the kind of people that you’re working with, how to communicate all that in order to deescalate the power struggle as much as possible.
And so you have to go through that, like you said, iterate as often as possible in figuring out how to have a board structure, how to have organization, how to have the kind of people that you’re working with, how to communicate all that in order to deescalate the power struggle as much as possible.
Sam Altman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Pacify it.
Pacify it.
Sam Altman
But at this point, it feels like something that was in the past that was really unpleasant and really difficult and painful, but we’re back to work and things are so busy and so intense that I don’t spend a lot of time thinking about it. There was a time after, there was this fugue state for the month after, maybe 45 days after, that I was just drifting through the days. I was so out of it. I was feeling so down.
But at this point, it feels like something that was in the past that was really unpleasant and really difficult and painful, but we’re back to work and things are so busy and so intense that I don’t spend a lot of time thinking about it. There was a time after, there was this fugue state for the month after, maybe 45 days after, that I was just drifting through the days. I was so out of it. I was feeling so down.
Lex Fridman
Just on a personal, psychological level?
Just on a personal, psychological level?
Sam Altman
Yeah. Really painful, and hard to have to keep running OpenAI in the middle of that. I just wanted to crawl into a cave and recover for a while. But now it’s like we’re just back to working on the mission.
Yeah. Really painful, and hard to have to keep running OpenAI in the middle of that. I just wanted to crawl into a cave and recover for a while. But now it’s like we’re just back to working on the mission.
Lex Fridman
Well, it’s still useful to go back there and reflect on board structures, on power dynamics, on how companies are run, the tension between research and product development and money and all this kind of stuff so that you, who have a very high potential of building AGI, would do so in a slightly more organized, less dramatic way in the future. So there’s value there to go, both the personal psychological aspects of you as a leader, and also just the board structure and all this messy stuff.
Well, it’s still useful to go back there and reflect on board structures, on power dynamics, on how companies are run, the tension between research and product development and money and all this kind of stuff so that you, who have a very high potential of building AGI, would do so in a slightly more organized, less dramatic way in the future. So there’s value there to go, both the personal psychological aspects of you as a leader, and also just the board structure and all this messy stuff.
Sam Altman
I definitely learned a lot about structure and incentives and what we need out of a board. And I think that it is valuable that this happened now in some sense. I think this is probably not the last high-stress moment of OpenAI, but it was quite a high-stress moment. My company very nearly got destroyed. And we think a lot about many of the other things we’ve got to get right for AGI, but thinking about how to build a resilient org and how to build a structure that will stand up to a lot of pressure in the world, which I expect more and more as we get closer, I think that’s super important.
I definitely learned a lot about structure and incentives and what we need out of a board. And I think that it is valuable that this happened now in some sense. I think this is probably not the last high-stress moment of OpenAI, but it was quite a high-stress moment. My company very nearly got destroyed. And we think a lot about many of the other things we’ve got to get right for AGI, but thinking about how to build a resilient org and how to build a structure that will stand up to a lot of pressure in the world, which I expect more and more as we get closer, I think that’s super important.
Lex Fridman
Do you have a sense of how deep and rigorous the deliberation process by the board was? Can you shine some light on just human dynamics involved in situations like this? Was it just a few conversations and all of a sudden it escalates and why don’t we fire Sam kind of thing?
Do you have a sense of how deep and rigorous the deliberation process by the board was? Can you shine some light on just human dynamics involved in situations like this? Was it just a few conversations and all of a sudden it escalates and why don’t we fire Sam kind of thing?
Sam Altman
I think the board members are well-meaning people on the whole, and I believe that in stressful situations where people feel time pressure or whatever, people understand and make suboptimal decisions. And I think one of the challenges for OpenAI will be we’re going to have to have a board and a team that are good at operating under pressure.
I think the board members are well-meaning people on the whole, and I believe that in stressful situations where people feel time pressure or whatever, people understand and make suboptimal decisions. And I think one of the challenges for OpenAI will be we’re going to have to have a board and a team that are good at operating under pressure.
Lex Fridman
Do you think the board had too much power?
Do you think the board had too much power?
Sam Altman
I think boards are supposed to have a lot of power, but one of the things that we did see is in most corporate structures, boards are usually answerable to shareholders. Sometimes people have super voting shares or whatever. In this case, and I think one of the things with our structure that we maybe should have thought about more than we did is that the board of a nonprofit has, unless you put other rules in place, quite a lot of power. They don’t really answer to anyone but themselves. And there’s ways in which that’s good, but what we’d really like is for the board of OpenAI to answer to the world as a whole, as much as that’s a practical thing.
I think boards are supposed to have a lot of power, but one of the things that we did see is in most corporate structures, boards are usually answerable to shareholders. Sometimes people have super voting shares or whatever. In this case, and I think one of the things with our structure that we maybe should have thought about more than we did is that the board of a nonprofit has, unless you put other rules in place, quite a lot of power. They don’t really answer to anyone but themselves. And there’s ways in which that’s good, but what we’d really like is for the board of OpenAI to answer to the world as a whole, as much as that’s a practical thing.
Lex Fridman
So there’s a new board announced.
So there’s a new board announced.
Sam Altman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
There’s I guess a new smaller board at first, and now there’s a new final board?
There’s I guess a new smaller board at first, and now there’s a new final board?
Sam Altman
Not a final board yet. We’ve added some. We’ll add more.
Not a final board yet. We’ve added some. We’ll add more.
Lex Fridman
Added some. Okay. What is fixed in the new one that was perhaps broken in the previous one?
Added some. Okay. What is fixed in the new one that was perhaps broken in the previous one?
Sam Altman
The old board got smaller over the course of about a year. It was nine and then it went down to six, and then we couldn’t agree on who to add. And the board also I think didn’t have a lot of experienced board members, and a lot of the new board members at OpenAI have just have more experience as board members. I think that’ll help.
The old board got smaller over the course of about a year. It was nine and then it went down to six, and then we couldn’t agree on who to add. And the board also I think didn’t have a lot of experienced board members, and a lot of the new board members at OpenAI have just have more experience as board members. I think that’ll help.
Lex Fridman
It’s been criticized, some of the people that are added to the board. I heard a lot of people criticizing the addition of Larry Summers, for example. What’s the process of selecting the board? What’s involved in that?
It’s been criticized, some of the people that are added to the board. I heard a lot of people criticizing the addition of Larry Summers, for example. What’s the process of selecting the board? What’s involved in that?
Sam Altman
So Brett and Larry were decided in the heat of the moment over this very tense weekend, and that weekend was a real rollercoaster. It was a lot of ups and downs. And we were trying to agree on new board members that both the executive team here and the old board members felt would be reasonable. Larry was actually one of their suggestions, the old board members. Brett, I think I had even previous to that weekend suggested, but he was busy and didn’t want to do it, and then we really needed help in [inaudible 00:09:22]. We talked about a lot of other people too, but I felt like if I was going to come back, I needed new board members. I didn’t think I could work with the old board again in the same configuration, although we then decided, and I’m grateful that Adam would stay, but we considered various configurations, decided we wanted to get to a board of three and had to find two new board members over the course of a short period of time.
So Brett and Larry were decided in the heat of the moment over this very tense weekend, and that weekend was a real rollercoaster. It was a lot of ups and downs. And we were trying to agree on new board members that both the executive team here and the old board members felt would be reasonable. Larry was actually one of their suggestions, the old board members. Brett, I think I had even previous to that weekend suggested, but he was busy and didn’t want to do it, and then we really needed help in [inaudible 00:09:22]. We talked about a lot of other people too, but I felt like if I was going to come back, I needed new board members. I didn’t think I could work with the old board again in the same configuration, although we then decided, and I’m grateful that Adam would stay, but we considered various configurations, decided we wanted to get to a board of three and had to find two new board members over the course of a short period of time.
So those were decided honestly without… You do that on the battlefield. You don’t have time to design a rigorous process then. For new board members since, and new board members we’ll add going forward, we have some criteria that we think are important for the board to have, different expertise that we want the board to have. Unlike hiring an executive where you need them to do one role well, the board needs to do a whole role of governance and thoughtfulness well, and so, one thing that Brett says which I really like is that we want to hire board members in slates, not as individuals one at a time. And thinking about a group of people that will bring nonprofit expertise, expertise at running companies, good legal and governance expertise, that’s what we’ve tried to optimize for.
Lex Fridman
So is technical savvy important for the individual board members?
So is technical savvy important for the individual board members?
Sam Altman
Not for every board member, but for certainly some you need that. That’s part of what the board needs to do.
Not for every board member, but for certainly some you need that. That’s part of what the board needs to do.
Lex Fridman
The interesting thing that people probably don’t understand about OpenAI, I certainly don’t, is all the details of running the business. When they think about the board, given the drama, they think about you. They think about if you reach AGI or you reach some of these incredibly impactful products and you build them and deploy them, what’s the conversation with the board like? And they think, all right, what’s the right squad to have in that kind of situation to deliberate?
The interesting thing that people probably don’t understand about OpenAI, I certainly don’t, is all the details of running the business. When they think about the board, given the drama, they think about you. They think about if you reach AGI or you reach some of these incredibly impactful products and you build them and deploy them, what’s the conversation with the board like? And they think, all right, what’s the right squad to have in that kind of situation to deliberate?
Sam Altman
Look, I think you definitely need some technical experts there. And then you need some people who are like, “How can we deploy this in a way that will help people in the world the most?” And people who have a very different perspective. I think a mistake that you or I might make is to think that only the technical understanding matters, and that’s definitely part of the conversation you want that board to have, but there’s a lot more about how that’s going to just impact society and people’s lives that you really want represented in there too.
Look, I think you definitely need some technical experts there. And then you need some people who are like, “How can we deploy this in a way that will help people in the world the most?” And people who have a very different perspective. I think a mistake that you or I might make is to think that only the technical understanding matters, and that’s definitely part of the conversation you want that board to have, but there’s a lot more about how that’s going to just impact society and people’s lives that you really want represented in there too.
Lex Fridman
Are you looking at the track record of people or you’re just having conversations?
Are you looking at the track record of people or you’re just having conversations?
Sam Altman
Track record is a big deal. You of course have a lot of conversations, but there are some roles where I totally ignore track record and just look at slope, ignore the Y-intercept.
Track record is a big deal. You of course have a lot of conversations, but there are some roles where I totally ignore track record and just look at slope, ignore the Y-intercept.
Lex Fridman
Thank you. Thank you for making it mathematical for the audience.
Thank you. Thank you for making it mathematical for the audience.
Sam Altman
For a board member, I do care much more about the Y-intercept. I think there is something deep to say about track record there, and experience is something’s very hard to replace.
For a board member, I do care much more about the Y-intercept. I think there is something deep to say about track record there, and experience is something’s very hard to replace.
Lex Fridman
Do you try to fit a polynomial function or exponential one to the track record?
Do you try to fit a polynomial function or exponential one to the track record?
Sam Altman
That analogy doesn’t carry that far.
That analogy doesn’t carry that far.
Lex Fridman
All right. You mentioned some of the low points that weekend. What were some of the low points psychologically for you? Did you consider going to the Amazon jungle and just taking ayahuasca and disappearing forever?
All right. You mentioned some of the low points that weekend. What were some of the low points psychologically for you? Did you consider going to the Amazon jungle and just taking ayahuasca and disappearing forever?
Sam Altman
It was a very bad period of time. There were great high points too. My phone was just nonstop blowing up with nice messages from people I worked with every day, people I hadn’t talked to in a decade. I didn’t get to appreciate that as much as I should have because I was just in the middle of this firefight, but that was really nice. But on the whole, it was a very painful weekend. It was like a battle fought in public to a surprising degree, and that was extremely exhausting to me, much more than I expected. I think fights are generally exhausting, but this one really was. The board did this Friday afternoon. I really couldn’t get much in the way of answers, but I also was just like, well, the board gets to do this, so I’m going to think for a little bit about what I want to do, but I’ll try to find the blessing in disguise here.
It was a very bad period of time. There were great high points too. My phone was just nonstop blowing up with nice messages from people I worked with every day, people I hadn’t talked to in a decade. I didn’t get to appreciate that as much as I should have because I was just in the middle of this firefight, but that was really nice. But on the whole, it was a very painful weekend. It was like a battle fought in public to a surprising degree, and that was extremely exhausting to me, much more than I expected. I think fights are generally exhausting, but this one really was. The board did this Friday afternoon. I really couldn’t get much in the way of answers, but I also was just like, well, the board gets to do this, so I’m going to think for a little bit about what I want to do, but I’ll try to find the blessing in disguise here.
And I was like, well, my current job at OpenAI is, or it was, to run a decently sized company at this point. And the thing I’d always liked the most was just getting to work with the researchers. And I was like, yeah, I can just go do a very focused AGI research effort. And I got excited about that. Didn’t even occur to me at the time possibly that this was all going to get undone. This was Friday afternoon.
Lex Fridman
So you’ve accepted the death of this-
So you’ve accepted the death of this-
Sam Altman
Very quickly. Very quickly. I went through a little period of confusion and rage, but very quickly, quickly. And by Friday night, I was talking to people about what was going to be next, and I was excited about that. I think it was Friday evening for the first time that I heard from the exec team here, which is like, “Hey, we’re going to fight this.” and then I went to bed just still being like, okay, excited. Onward.
Very quickly. Very quickly. I went through a little period of confusion and rage, but very quickly, quickly. And by Friday night, I was talking to people about what was going to be next, and I was excited about that. I think it was Friday evening for the first time that I heard from the exec team here, which is like, “Hey, we’re going to fight this.” and then I went to bed just still being like, okay, excited. Onward.
Lex Fridman
Were you able to sleep?
Were you able to sleep?
Sam Altman
Not a lot. One of the weird things was there was this period of four and a half days where I didn’t sleep much, didn’t eat much, and still had a surprising amount of energy. You learn a weird thing about adrenaline in wartime.
Not a lot. One of the weird things was there was this period of four and a half days where I didn’t sleep much, didn’t eat much, and still had a surprising amount of energy. You learn a weird thing about adrenaline in wartime.
Lex Fridman
So you accepted the death of this baby, OpenAI.
So you accepted the death of this baby, OpenAI.
Sam Altman
And I was excited for the new thing. I was just like, “Okay, this was crazy, but whatever.”
And I was excited for the new thing. I was just like, “Okay, this was crazy, but whatever.”
Lex Fridman
It’s a very good coping mechanism.
It’s a very good coping mechanism.
Sam Altman
And then Saturday morning, two of the board members called and said, “Hey, we didn’t mean to destabilize things. We don’t want to store a lot of value here. Can we talk about you coming back?” And I immediately didn’t want to do that, but I thought a little more and I was like, well, I really care about the people here, the partners, shareholders. I love this company. And so I thought about it and I was like, “Well, okay, but here’s the stuff I would need.” And then the most painful time of all was over the course of that weekend, I kept thinking and being told, and not just me, the whole team here kept thinking, well, we were trying to keep OpenAI stabilized while the whole world was trying to break it apart, people trying to recruit whatever.
And then Saturday morning, two of the board members called and said, “Hey, we didn’t mean to destabilize things. We don’t want to store a lot of value here. Can we talk about you coming back?” And I immediately didn’t want to do that, but I thought a little more and I was like, well, I really care about the people here, the partners, shareholders. I love this company. And so I thought about it and I was like, “Well, okay, but here’s the stuff I would need.” And then the most painful time of all was over the course of that weekend, I kept thinking and being told, and not just me, the whole team here kept thinking, well, we were trying to keep OpenAI stabilized while the whole world was trying to break it apart, people trying to recruit whatever.
We kept being told, all right, we’re almost done. We’re almost done. We just need a little bit more time. And it was this very confusing state. And then Sunday evening when, again, every few hours I expected that we were going to be done and we’re going to figure out a way for me to return and things to go back to how they were. The board then appointed a new interim CEO, and then I was like, that feels really bad. That was the low point of the whole thing. I’ll tell you something. It felt very painful, but I felt a lot of love that whole weekend. Other than that one moment Sunday night, I would not characterize my emotions as anger or hate, but I felt a lot of love from people, towards people. It was painful, but the dominant emotion of the weekend was love, not hate.
Lex Fridman
You’ve spoken highly of Mira Murati, that she helped especially, as you put in the tweet, in the quiet moments when it counts. Perhaps we could take a bit of a tangent. What do you admire about Mira?
You’ve spoken highly of Mira Murati, that she helped especially, as you put in the tweet, in the quiet moments when it counts. Perhaps we could take a bit of a tangent. What do you admire about Mira?
Sam Altman
Well, she did a great job during that weekend in a lot of chaos, but people often see leaders in the crisis moments, good or bad. But a thing I really value in leaders is how people act on a boring Tuesday at 9:46 in the morning and in just the normal drudgery of the day-to-day. How someone shows up in a meeting, the quality of the decisions they make. That was what I meant about the quiet moments.
Well, she did a great job during that weekend in a lot of chaos, but people often see leaders in the crisis moments, good or bad. But a thing I really value in leaders is how people act on a boring Tuesday at 9:46 in the morning and in just the normal drudgery of the day-to-day. How someone shows up in a meeting, the quality of the decisions they make. That was what I meant about the quiet moments.
Lex Fridman
Meaning most of the work is done on a day-by-day, in meeting-by-meeting. Just be present and make great decisions.
Meaning most of the work is done on a day-by-day, in meeting-by-meeting. Just be present and make great decisions.
Sam Altman
Yeah. Look, what you have wanted to spend the last 20 minutes about, and I understand, is this one very dramatic weekend, but that’s not really what OpenAI is about. OpenAI is really about the other seven years.
Yeah. Look, what you have wanted to spend the last 20 minutes about, and I understand, is this one very dramatic weekend, but that’s not really what OpenAI is about. OpenAI is really about the other seven years.
Lex Fridman
Well, yeah. Human civilization is not about the invasion of the Soviet Union by Nazi Germany, but still that’s something people focus on.
Well, yeah. Human civilization is not about the invasion of the Soviet Union by Nazi Germany, but still that’s something people focus on.
Sam Altman
Very understandable.
Very understandable.
Lex Fridman
It gives us an insight into human nature, the extremes of human nature, and perhaps some of the damage in some of the triumphs of human civilization can happen in those moments, so it’s illustrative. Let me ask you about Ilya. Is he being held hostage in a secret nuclear facility?
It gives us an insight into human nature, the extremes of human nature, and perhaps some of the damage in some of the triumphs of human civilization can happen in those moments, so it’s illustrative. Let me ask you about Ilya. Is he being held hostage in a secret nuclear facility?
Ilya Sutskever
Sam Altman
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
What about a regular secret facility?
What about a regular secret facility?
Sam Altman
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
What about a nuclear non-secret facility?
What about a nuclear non-secret facility?
Sam Altman
Neither. Not that either.
Neither. Not that either.
Lex Fridman
This is becoming a meme at some point. You’ve known Ilya for a long time. He was obviously part of this drama with the board and all that kind of stuff. What’s your relationship with him now?
This is becoming a meme at some point. You’ve known Ilya for a long time. He was obviously part of this drama with the board and all that kind of stuff. What’s your relationship with him now?
Sam Altman
I love Ilya. I have tremendous respect for Ilya. I don’t have anything I can say about his plans right now. That’s a question for him, but I really hope we work together for certainly the rest of my career. He’s a little bit younger than me. Maybe he works a little bit longer.
I love Ilya. I have tremendous respect for Ilya. I don’t have anything I can say about his plans right now. That’s a question for him, but I really hope we work together for certainly the rest of my career. He’s a little bit younger than me. Maybe he works a little bit longer.
Lex Fridman
There’s a meme that he saw something, like he maybe saw AGI and that gave him a lot of worry internally. What did Ilya see?
There’s a meme that he saw something, like he maybe saw AGI and that gave him a lot of worry internally. What did Ilya see?
Sam Altman
Ilya has not seen AGI. None of us have seen AGI. We’ve not built AGI. I do think one of the many things that I really love about Ilya is he takes AGI and the safety concerns, broadly speaking, including things like the impact this is going to have on society, very seriously. And as we continue to make significant progress, Ilya is one of the people that I’ve spent the most time over the last couple of years talking about what this is going to mean, what we need to do to ensure we get it right, to ensure that we succeed at the mission. So Ilya did not see AGI, but Ilya is a credit to humanity in terms of how much he thinks and worries about making sure we get this right.
Ilya has not seen AGI. None of us have seen AGI. We’ve not built AGI. I do think one of the many things that I really love about Ilya is he takes AGI and the safety concerns, broadly speaking, including things like the impact this is going to have on society, very seriously. And as we continue to make significant progress, Ilya is one of the people that I’ve spent the most time over the last couple of years talking about what this is going to mean, what we need to do to ensure we get it right, to ensure that we succeed at the mission. So Ilya did not see AGI, but Ilya is a credit to humanity in terms of how much he thinks and worries about making sure we get this right.
Lex Fridman
I’ve had a bunch of conversation with him in the past. I think when he talks about technology, he’s always doing this long-term thinking type of thing. So he is not thinking about what this is going to be in a year. He’s thinking about in 10 years, just thinking from first principles like, “Okay, if this scales, what are the fundamentals here? Where’s this going?” And so that’s a foundation for them thinking about all the other safety concerns and all that kind of stuff, which makes him a really fascinating human to talk with. Do you have any idea why he’s been quiet? Is it he’s just doing some soul-searching?
I’ve had a bunch of conversation with him in the past. I think when he talks about technology, he’s always doing this long-term thinking type of thing. So he is not thinking about what this is going to be in a year. He’s thinking about in 10 years, just thinking from first principles like, “Okay, if this scales, what are the fundamentals here? Where’s this going?” And so that’s a foundation for them thinking about all the other safety concerns and all that kind of stuff, which makes him a really fascinating human to talk with. Do you have any idea why he’s been quiet? Is it he’s just doing some soul-searching?
Sam Altman
Again, I don’t want to speak for Ilya. I think that you should ask him that. He’s definitely a thoughtful guy. I think Ilya is always on a soul search in a really good way.
Again, I don’t want to speak for Ilya. I think that you should ask him that. He’s definitely a thoughtful guy. I think Ilya is always on a soul search in a really good way.
Lex Fridman
Yes. Yeah. Also, he appreciates the power of silence. Also, I’m told he can be a silly guy, which I’ve never seen that side of him.
Yes. Yeah. Also, he appreciates the power of silence. Also, I’m told he can be a silly guy, which I’ve never seen that side of him.
Sam Altman
It’s very sweet when that happens.
It’s very sweet when that happens.
Lex Fridman
I’ve never witnessed a silly Ilya, but I look forward to that as well.
I’ve never witnessed a silly Ilya, but I look forward to that as well.
Sam Altman
I was at a dinner party with him recently and he was playing with a puppy and he was in a very silly mood, very endearing. And I was thinking, oh man, this is not the side of Ilya that the world sees the most.
I was at a dinner party with him recently and he was playing with a puppy and he was in a very silly mood, very endearing. And I was thinking, oh man, this is not the side of Ilya that the world sees the most.
Lex Fridman
So just to wrap up this whole saga, are you feeling good about the board structure-
So just to wrap up this whole saga, are you feeling good about the board structure-
Sam Altman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
… about all of this and where it’s moving?
… about all of this and where it’s moving?
Sam Altman
I feel great about the new board. In terms of the structure of OpenAI, one of the board’s tasks is to look at that and see where we can make it more robust. We wanted to get new board members in place first, but we clearly learned a lesson about structure throughout this process. I don’t have, I think, super deep things to say. It was a crazy, very painful experience. I think it was a perfect storm of weirdness. It was a preview for me of what’s going to happen as the stakes get higher and higher and the need that we have robust governance structures and processes and people. I’m happy it happened when it did, but it was a shockingly painful thing to go through.
I feel great about the new board. In terms of the structure of OpenAI, one of the board’s tasks is to look at that and see where we can make it more robust. We wanted to get new board members in place first, but we clearly learned a lesson about structure throughout this process. I don’t have, I think, super deep things to say. It was a crazy, very painful experience. I think it was a perfect storm of weirdness. It was a preview for me of what’s going to happen as the stakes get higher and higher and the need that we have robust governance structures and processes and people. I’m happy it happened when it did, but it was a shockingly painful thing to go through.
Lex Fridman
Did it make you be more hesitant in trusting people?
Did it make you be more hesitant in trusting people?
Sam Altman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Just on a personal level?
Just on a personal level?
Sam Altman
Yes. I think I’m like an extremely trusting person. I’ve always had a life philosophy of don’t worry about all of the paranoia. Don’t worry about the edge cases. You get a little bit screwed in exchange for getting to live with your guard down. And this was so shocking to me. I was so caught off guard that it has definitely changed, and I really don’t like this, it’s definitely changed how I think about just default trust of people and planning for the bad scenarios.
Yes. I think I’m like an extremely trusting person. I’ve always had a life philosophy of don’t worry about all of the paranoia. Don’t worry about the edge cases. You get a little bit screwed in exchange for getting to live with your guard down. And this was so shocking to me. I was so caught off guard that it has definitely changed, and I really don’t like this, it’s definitely changed how I think about just default trust of people and planning for the bad scenarios.
Lex Fridman
You got to be careful with that. Are you worried about becoming a little too cynical?
You got to be careful with that. Are you worried about becoming a little too cynical?
Sam Altman
I’m not worried about becoming too cynical. I think I’m the extreme opposite of a cynical person, but I’m worried about just becoming less of a default trusting person.
I’m not worried about becoming too cynical. I think I’m the extreme opposite of a cynical person, but I’m worried about just becoming less of a default trusting person.
Lex Fridman
I’m actually not sure which mode is best to operate in for a person who’s developing AGI, trusting or un-trusting. It’s an interesting journey you’re on. But in terms of structure, see, I’m more interested on the human level. How do you surround yourself with humans that are building cool shit, but also are making wise decisions? Because the more money you start making, the more power the thing has, the weirder people get.
I’m actually not sure which mode is best to operate in for a person who’s developing AGI, trusting or un-trusting. It’s an interesting journey you’re on. But in terms of structure, see, I’m more interested on the human level. How do you surround yourself with humans that are building cool shit, but also are making wise decisions? Because the more money you start making, the more power the thing has, the weirder people get.
Sam Altman
I think you could make all kinds of comments about the board members and the level of trust I should have had there, or how I should have done things differently. But in terms of the team here, I think you’d have to give me a very good grade on that one. And I have just enormous gratitude and trust and respect for the people that I work with every day, and I think being surrounded with people like that is really important.
I think you could make all kinds of comments about the board members and the level of trust I should have had there, or how I should have done things differently. But in terms of the team here, I think you’d have to give me a very good grade on that one. And I have just enormous gratitude and trust and respect for the people that I work with every day, and I think being surrounded with people like that is really important.
Elon Musk lawsuit
Lex Fridman
Our mutual friend Elon sued OpenAI. What to you is the essence of what he’s criticizing? To what degree does he have a point? To what degree is he wrong?
Our mutual friend Elon sued OpenAI. What to you is the essence of what he’s criticizing? To what degree does he have a point? To what degree is he wrong?
Sam Altman
I don’t know what it’s really about. We started off just thinking we were going to be a research lab and having no idea about how this technology was going to go. Because it was only seven or eight years ago, it’s hard to go back and really remember what it was like then, but this is before language models were a big deal. This was before we had any idea about an API or selling access to a chatbot. It was before we had any idea we were going to productize at all. So we’re like, “We’re just going to try to do research and we don’t really know what we’re going to do with that.” I think with many fundamentally new things, you start fumbling through the dark and you make some assumptions, most of which turned out to be wrong.
I don’t know what it’s really about. We started off just thinking we were going to be a research lab and having no idea about how this technology was going to go. Because it was only seven or eight years ago, it’s hard to go back and really remember what it was like then, but this is before language models were a big deal. This was before we had any idea about an API or selling access to a chatbot. It was before we had any idea we were going to productize at all. So we’re like, “We’re just going to try to do research and we don’t really know what we’re going to do with that.” I think with many fundamentally new things, you start fumbling through the dark and you make some assumptions, most of which turned out to be wrong.
And then it became clear that we were going to need to do different things and also have huge amounts more capital. So we said, “Okay, well, the structure doesn’t quite work for that. How do we patch the structure?” And then you patch it again and patch it again and you end up with something that does look eyebrow-raising, to say the least. But we got here gradually with, I think, reasonable decisions at each point along the way. And it doesn’t mean I wouldn’t do it totally differently if we could go back now with an Oracle, but you don’t get the Oracle at the time. But anyway, in terms of what Elon’s real motivations here are, I don’t know.
Lex Fridman
To the degree you remember, what was the response that OpenAI gave in the blog post? Can you summarize it?
To the degree you remember, what was the response that OpenAI gave in the blog post? Can you summarize it?
Sam Altman
Oh, we just said Elon said this set of things. Here’s our characterization, or here’s not our characterization. Here’s the characterization of how this went down. We tried to not make it emotional and just say, “Here’s the history.”
Oh, we just said Elon said this set of things. Here’s our characterization, or here’s not our characterization. Here’s the characterization of how this went down. We tried to not make it emotional and just say, “Here’s the history.”
Lex Fridman
I do think there’s a degree of mischaracterization from Elon here about one of the points you just made, which is the degree of uncertainty you had at the time. You guys are a small group of researchers crazily talking about AGI when everybody’s laughing at that thought.
I do think there’s a degree of mischaracterization from Elon here about one of the points you just made, which is the degree of uncertainty you had at the time. You guys are a small group of researchers crazily talking about AGI when everybody’s laughing at that thought.
Sam Altman
It wasn’t that long ago Elon was crazily talking about launching rockets when people were laughing at that thought, so I think he’d have more empathy for this.
It wasn’t that long ago Elon was crazily talking about launching rockets when people were laughing at that thought, so I think he’d have more empathy for this.
Lex Fridman
I do think that there’s personal stuff here, that there was a split that OpenAI and a lot of amazing people here chose to part ways with Elon, so there’s a personal-
I do think that there’s personal stuff here, that there was a split that OpenAI and a lot of amazing people here chose to part ways with Elon, so there’s a personal-
Sam Altman
Elon chose to part ways.
Elon chose to part ways.
Lex Fridman
Can you describe that exactly? The choosing to part ways?
Can you describe that exactly? The choosing to part ways?
Sam Altman
He thought OpenAI was going to fail. He wanted total control to turn it around. We wanted to keep going in the direction that now has become OpenAI. He also wanted Tesla to be able to build an AGI effort. At various times, he wanted to make OpenAI into a for-profit company that he could have control of or have it merge with Tesla. We didn’t want to do that, and he decided to leave, which that’s fine.
He thought OpenAI was going to fail. He wanted total control to turn it around. We wanted to keep going in the direction that now has become OpenAI. He also wanted Tesla to be able to build an AGI effort. At various times, he wanted to make OpenAI into a for-profit company that he could have control of or have it merge with Tesla. We didn’t want to do that, and he decided to leave, which that’s fine.
Lex Fridman
So you’re saying, and that’s one of the things that the blog post says, is that he wanted OpenAI to be basically acquired by Tesla in the same way that, or maybe something similar or maybe something more dramatic than the partnership with Microsoft.
So you’re saying, and that’s one of the things that the blog post says, is that he wanted OpenAI to be basically acquired by Tesla in the same way that, or maybe something similar or maybe something more dramatic than the partnership with Microsoft.
Sam Altman
My memory is the proposal was just like, yeah, get acquired by Tesla and have Tesla have full control over it. I’m pretty sure that’s what it was.
My memory is the proposal was just like, yeah, get acquired by Tesla and have Tesla have full control over it. I’m pretty sure that’s what it was.
Lex Fridman
So what does the word open in OpenAI mean to Elon at the time? Ilya has talked about this in the email exchanges and all this kind of stuff. What does it mean to you at the time? What does it mean to you now?
So what does the word open in OpenAI mean to Elon at the time? Ilya has talked about this in the email exchanges and all this kind of stuff. What does it mean to you at the time? What does it mean to you now?
Sam Altman
Speaking of going back with an Oracle, I’d pick a different name. One of the things that I think OpenAI is doing that is the most important of everything that we’re doing is putting powerful technology in the hands of people for free, as a public good. We don’t run ads on our-
Speaking of going back with an Oracle, I’d pick a different name. One of the things that I think OpenAI is doing that is the most important of everything that we’re doing is putting powerful technology in the hands of people for free, as a public good. We don’t run ads on our-
Sam Altman
… as a public good. We don’t run ads on our free version. We don’t monetize it in other ways. We just say it’s part of our mission. We want to put increasingly powerful tools in the hands of people for free and get them to use them. I think that kind of open is really important to our mission. I think if you give people great tools and teach them to use them or don’t even teach them, they’ll figure it out, and let them go build an incredible future for each other with that, that’s a big deal. So if we can keep putting free or low cost or free and low cost powerful AI tools out in the world, I think that’s a huge deal for how we fulfill the mission. Open source or not, yeah, I think we should open source some stuff and not other stuff. It does become this religious battle line where nuance is hard to have, but I think nuance is the right answer.
… as a public good. We don’t run ads on our free version. We don’t monetize it in other ways. We just say it’s part of our mission. We want to put increasingly powerful tools in the hands of people for free and get them to use them. I think that kind of open is really important to our mission. I think if you give people great tools and teach them to use them or don’t even teach them, they’ll figure it out, and let them go build an incredible future for each other with that, that’s a big deal. So if we can keep putting free or low cost or free and low cost powerful AI tools out in the world, I think that’s a huge deal for how we fulfill the mission. Open source or not, yeah, I think we should open source some stuff and not other stuff. It does become this religious battle line where nuance is hard to have, but I think nuance is the right answer.
Lex Fridman
So he said, “Change your name to CloseAI and I’ll drop the lawsuit.” I mean is it going to become this battleground in the land of memes about the name?
So he said, “Change your name to CloseAI and I’ll drop the lawsuit.” I mean is it going to become this battleground in the land of memes about the name?
Sam Altman
I think that speaks to the seriousness with which Elon means the lawsuit, and that’s like an astonishing thing to say, I think.
I think that speaks to the seriousness with which Elon means the lawsuit, and that’s like an astonishing thing to say, I think.
Lex Fridman
Maybe correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think the lawsuit is legally serious. It’s more to make a point about the future of AGI and the company that’s currently leading the way.
Maybe correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think the lawsuit is legally serious. It’s more to make a point about the future of AGI and the company that’s currently leading the way.
Sam Altman
Look, I mean Grok had not open sourced anything until people pointed out it was a little bit hypocritical and then he announced that Grok will open source things this week. I don’t think open source versus not is what this is really about for him.
Look, I mean Grok had not open sourced anything until people pointed out it was a little bit hypocritical and then he announced that Grok will open source things this week. I don’t think open source versus not is what this is really about for him.
Lex Fridman
Well, we will talk about open source and not. I do think maybe criticizing the competition is great. Just talking a little shit, that’s great. But friendly competition versus like, “I personally hate lawsuits.”
Well, we will talk about open source and not. I do think maybe criticizing the competition is great. Just talking a little shit, that’s great. But friendly competition versus like, “I personally hate lawsuits.”
Sam Altman
Look, I think this whole thing is unbecoming of a builder. And I respect Elon as one of the great builders of our time. I know he knows what it’s like to have haters attack him and it makes me extra sad he’s doing it toss.
Look, I think this whole thing is unbecoming of a builder. And I respect Elon as one of the great builders of our time. I know he knows what it’s like to have haters attack him and it makes me extra sad he’s doing it toss.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, he’s one of the greatest builders of all time, potentially the greatest builder of all time.
Yeah, he’s one of the greatest builders of all time, potentially the greatest builder of all time.
Sam Altman
It makes me sad. And I think it makes a lot of people sad. There’s a lot of people who’ve really looked up to him for a long time. I said in some interview or something that I missed the old Elon and the number of messages I got being like, “That exactly encapsulates how I feel.”
It makes me sad. And I think it makes a lot of people sad. There’s a lot of people who’ve really looked up to him for a long time. I said in some interview or something that I missed the old Elon and the number of messages I got being like, “That exactly encapsulates how I feel.”
Lex Fridman
I think he should just win. He should just make X Grok beat GPT and then GPT beats Grok and it’s just the competition and it’s beautiful for everybody. But on the question of open source, do you think there’s a lot of companies playing with this idea? It’s quite interesting. I would say Meta surprisingly has led the way on this, or at least took the first step in the game of chess of really open sourcing the model. Of course it’s not the state-of-the-art model, but open sourcing Llama Google is flirting with the idea of open sourcing a smaller version. What are the pros and cons of open sourcing? Have you played around with this idea?
I think he should just win. He should just make X Grok beat GPT and then GPT beats Grok and it’s just the competition and it’s beautiful for everybody. But on the question of open source, do you think there’s a lot of companies playing with this idea? It’s quite interesting. I would say Meta surprisingly has led the way on this, or at least took the first step in the game of chess of really open sourcing the model. Of course it’s not the state-of-the-art model, but open sourcing Llama Google is flirting with the idea of open sourcing a smaller version. What are the pros and cons of open sourcing? Have you played around with this idea?
Sam Altman
Yeah, I think there is definitely a place for open source models, particularly smaller models that people can run locally, I think there’s huge demand for. I think there will be some open source models, there will be some closed source models. It won’t be unlike other ecosystems in that way.
Yeah, I think there is definitely a place for open source models, particularly smaller models that people can run locally, I think there’s huge demand for. I think there will be some open source models, there will be some closed source models. It won’t be unlike other ecosystems in that way.
Lex Fridman
I listened to all in podcasts talking about this lawsuit and all that kind of stuff. They were more concerned about the precedent of going from nonprofit to this cap for profit. What precedent that sets for other startups? Is that something-
I listened to all in podcasts talking about this lawsuit and all that kind of stuff. They were more concerned about the precedent of going from nonprofit to this cap for profit. What precedent that sets for other startups? Is that something-
Sam Altman
I would heavily discourage any startup that was thinking about starting as a nonprofit and adding a for-profit arm later. I’d heavily discourage them from doing that. I don’t think we’ll set a precedent here.
I would heavily discourage any startup that was thinking about starting as a nonprofit and adding a for-profit arm later. I’d heavily discourage them from doing that. I don’t think we’ll set a precedent here.
Lex Fridman
Okay. So most startups should go just-
Okay. So most startups should go just-
Sam Altman
For sure.
For sure.
Lex Fridman
And again-
And again-
Sam Altman
If we knew what was going to happen, we would’ve done that too.
If we knew what was going to happen, we would’ve done that too.
Lex Fridman
Well in theory, if you dance beautifully here, there’s some tax incentives or whatever, but…
Well in theory, if you dance beautifully here, there’s some tax incentives or whatever, but…
Sam Altman
I don’t think that’s how most people think about these things.
I don’t think that’s how most people think about these things.
Lex Fridman
It’s just not possible to save a lot of money for a startup if you do it this way.
It’s just not possible to save a lot of money for a startup if you do it this way.
Sam Altman
No, I think there’s laws that would make that pretty difficult.
No, I think there’s laws that would make that pretty difficult.
Lex Fridman
Where do you hope this goes with Elon? This tension, this dance, what do you hope this? If we go 1, 2, 3 years from now, your relationship with him on a personal level too, like friendship, friendly competition, just all this kind of stuff.
Where do you hope this goes with Elon? This tension, this dance, what do you hope this? If we go 1, 2, 3 years from now, your relationship with him on a personal level too, like friendship, friendly competition, just all this kind of stuff.
Sam Altman
Yeah, I really respect Elon and I hope that years in the future we have an amicable relationship.
Yeah, I really respect Elon and I hope that years in the future we have an amicable relationship.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I hope you guys have an amicable relationship this month and just compete and win and explore these ideas together. I do suppose there’s competition for talent or whatever, but it should be friendly competition. Just build cool shit. And Elon is pretty good at building cool shit. So are you.
Yeah, I hope you guys have an amicable relationship this month and just compete and win and explore these ideas together. I do suppose there’s competition for talent or whatever, but it should be friendly competition. Just build cool shit. And Elon is pretty good at building cool shit. So are you.
Sora
So speaking of cool shit, Sora. There’s like a million questions I could ask. First of all, it’s amazing. It truly is amazing on a product level but also just on a philosophical level. So let me just technical/philosophical ask, what do you think it understands about the world more or less than GPT-4 for example? The world model when you train on these patches versus language tokens.
Sam Altman
I think all of these models understand something more about the world model than most of us give them credit for. And because they’re also very clear things they just don’t understand or don’t get right, it’s easy to look at the weaknesses, see through the veil and say, “Ah, this is all fake.” But it’s not all fake. It’s just some of it works and some of it doesn’t work.
I think all of these models understand something more about the world model than most of us give them credit for. And because they’re also very clear things they just don’t understand or don’t get right, it’s easy to look at the weaknesses, see through the veil and say, “Ah, this is all fake.” But it’s not all fake. It’s just some of it works and some of it doesn’t work.
I remember when I started first watching Sora videos and I would see a person walk in front of something for a few seconds and occlude it and then walk away and the same thing was still there. I was like, “Oh, this is pretty good.” Or there’s examples where the underlying physics looks so well represented over a lot of steps in a sequence, it’s like, “|Oh, this is quite impressive.” But fundamentally, these models are just getting better and that will keep happening. If you look at the trajectory from DALL·E 1 to 2 to 3 to Sora, there are a lot of people that were dunked on each version saying it can’t do this, it can’t do that and look at it now.
Lex Fridman
Well, the thing you just mentioned is the occlusions is basically modeling the physics of the three-dimensional physics of the world sufficiently well to capture those kinds of things.
Well, the thing you just mentioned is the occlusions is basically modeling the physics of the three-dimensional physics of the world sufficiently well to capture those kinds of things.
Sam Altman
Well…
Well…
Lex Fridman
Or yeah, maybe you can tell me, in order to deal with occlusions, what does the world model need to?
Or yeah, maybe you can tell me, in order to deal with occlusions, what does the world model need to?
Sam Altman
Yeah. So what I would say is it’s doing something to deal with occlusions really well. What I represent that it has a great underlying 3D model of the world, it’s a little bit more of a stretch.
Yeah. So what I would say is it’s doing something to deal with occlusions really well. What I represent that it has a great underlying 3D model of the world, it’s a little bit more of a stretch.
Lex Fridman
But can you get there through just these kinds of two-dimensional training data approaches?
But can you get there through just these kinds of two-dimensional training data approaches?
Sam Altman
It looks like this approach is going to go surprisingly far. I don’t want to speculate too much about what limits it will surmount and which it won’t, but…
It looks like this approach is going to go surprisingly far. I don’t want to speculate too much about what limits it will surmount and which it won’t, but…
Lex Fridman
What are some interesting limitations of the system that you’ve seen? I mean there’s been some fun ones you’ve posted.
What are some interesting limitations of the system that you’ve seen? I mean there’s been some fun ones you’ve posted.
Sam Altman
There’s all kinds of fun. I mean, cat’s sprouting an extra limit at random points in a video. Pick what you want, but there’s still a lot of problem, there’s a lot of weaknesses.
There’s all kinds of fun. I mean, cat’s sprouting an extra limit at random points in a video. Pick what you want, but there’s still a lot of problem, there’s a lot of weaknesses.
Lex Fridman
Do you think it’s a fundamental flaw of the approach or is it just bigger model or better technical details or better data, more data is going to solve the cat sprouting [inaudible 00:37:19]?
Do you think it’s a fundamental flaw of the approach or is it just bigger model or better technical details or better data, more data is going to solve the cat sprouting [inaudible 00:37:19]?
Sam Altman
I would say yes to both. I think there is something about the approach which just seems to feel different from how we think and learn and whatever. And then also I think it’ll get better with scale.
I would say yes to both. I think there is something about the approach which just seems to feel different from how we think and learn and whatever. And then also I think it’ll get better with scale.
Lex Fridman
Like I mentioned, LLMS have tokens, text tokens, and Sora has visual patches so it converts all visual data, a diverse kinds of visual data videos and images into patches. Is the training to the degree you can say fully self supervised, there’s some manual labeling going on? What’s the involvement of humans in all this?
Like I mentioned, LLMS have tokens, text tokens, and Sora has visual patches so it converts all visual data, a diverse kinds of visual data videos and images into patches. Is the training to the degree you can say fully self supervised, there’s some manual labeling going on? What’s the involvement of humans in all this?
Sam Altman
I mean without saying anything specific about the Sora approach, we use lots of human data in our work.
I mean without saying anything specific about the Sora approach, we use lots of human data in our work.
Lex Fridman
But not internet scale data? So lots of humans. Lots is a complicated word, Sam.
But not internet scale data? So lots of humans. Lots is a complicated word, Sam.
Sam Altman
I think lots is a fair word in this case.
I think lots is a fair word in this case.
Lex Fridman
Because to me, “lots”… Listen, I’m an introvert and when I hang out with three people, that’s a lot of people. Four people, that’s a lot. But I suppose you mean more than…
Because to me, “lots”… Listen, I’m an introvert and when I hang out with three people, that’s a lot of people. Four people, that’s a lot. But I suppose you mean more than…
Sam Altman
More than three people work on labeling the data for these models, yeah.
More than three people work on labeling the data for these models, yeah.
Lex Fridman
Okay. Right. But fundamentally, there’s a lot of self supervised learning. Because what you mentioned in the technical report is internet scale data. That’s another beautiful… It’s like poetry. So it’s a lot of data that’s not human label. It’s self supervised in that way?
Okay. Right. But fundamentally, there’s a lot of self supervised learning. Because what you mentioned in the technical report is internet scale data. That’s another beautiful… It’s like poetry. So it’s a lot of data that’s not human label. It’s self supervised in that way?
Sam Altman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
And then the question is, how much data is there on the internet that could be used in this that is conducive to this kind of self supervised way if only we knew the details of the self supervised. Have you considered opening it up a little more details?
And then the question is, how much data is there on the internet that could be used in this that is conducive to this kind of self supervised way if only we knew the details of the self supervised. Have you considered opening it up a little more details?
Sam Altman
We have. You mean for source specifically?
We have. You mean for source specifically?
Lex Fridman
Source specifically. Because it’s so interesting that can the same magic of LLMs now start moving towards visual data and what does that take to do that?
Source specifically. Because it’s so interesting that can the same magic of LLMs now start moving towards visual data and what does that take to do that?
Sam Altman
I mean it looks to me like yes, but we have more work to do.
I mean it looks to me like yes, but we have more work to do.
Lex Fridman
Sure. What are the dangers? Why are you concerned about releasing the system? What are some possible dangers of this?
Sure. What are the dangers? Why are you concerned about releasing the system? What are some possible dangers of this?
Sam Altman
I mean frankly speaking, one thing we have to do before releasing the system is just get it to work at a level of efficiency that will deliver the scale people are going to want from this so that I don’t want to downplay that. And there’s still a ton ton of work to do there. But you can imagine issues with deepfakes, misinformation. We try to be a thoughtful company about what we put out into the world and it doesn’t take much thought to think about the ways this can go badly.
I mean frankly speaking, one thing we have to do before releasing the system is just get it to work at a level of efficiency that will deliver the scale people are going to want from this so that I don’t want to downplay that. And there’s still a ton ton of work to do there. But you can imagine issues with deepfakes, misinformation. We try to be a thoughtful company about what we put out into the world and it doesn’t take much thought to think about the ways this can go badly.
Lex Fridman
There’s a lot of tough questions here, you’re dealing in a very tough space. Do you think training AI should be or is fair use under copyright law?
There’s a lot of tough questions here, you’re dealing in a very tough space. Do you think training AI should be or is fair use under copyright law?
Sam Altman
I think the question behind that question is, do people who create valuable data deserve to have some way that they get compensated for use of it, and that I think the answer is yes. I don’t know yet what the answer is. People have proposed a lot of different things. We’ve tried some different models. But if I’m like an artist for example, A, I would like to be able to opt out of people generating art in my style. And B, if they do generate art in my style, I’d like to have some economic model associated with that.
I think the question behind that question is, do people who create valuable data deserve to have some way that they get compensated for use of it, and that I think the answer is yes. I don’t know yet what the answer is. People have proposed a lot of different things. We’ve tried some different models. But if I’m like an artist for example, A, I would like to be able to opt out of people generating art in my style. And B, if they do generate art in my style, I’d like to have some economic model associated with that.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s that transition from CDs to Napster to Spotify. We have to figure out some kind of model.
Yeah, it’s that transition from CDs to Napster to Spotify. We have to figure out some kind of model.
Sam Altman
The model changes but people have got to get paid.
The model changes but people have got to get paid.
Lex Fridman
Well, there should be some kind of incentive if we zoom out even more for humans to keep doing cool shit.
Well, there should be some kind of incentive if we zoom out even more for humans to keep doing cool shit.
Sam Altman
Of everything I worry about, humans are going to do cool shit and society is going to find some way to reward it. That seems pretty hardwired. We want to create, we want to be useful, we want to achieve status in whatever way. That’s not going anywhere I don’t think.
Of everything I worry about, humans are going to do cool shit and society is going to find some way to reward it. That seems pretty hardwired. We want to create, we want to be useful, we want to achieve status in whatever way. That’s not going anywhere I don’t think.
Lex Fridman
But the reward might not be monetary financially. It might be fame and celebration of other cool-
But the reward might not be monetary financially. It might be fame and celebration of other cool-
Sam Altman
Maybe financial in some other way. Again, I don’t think we’ve seen the last evolution of how the economic system’s going to work.
Maybe financial in some other way. Again, I don’t think we’ve seen the last evolution of how the economic system’s going to work.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but artists and creators are worried. When they see Sora, they’re like, “Holy shit.”
Yeah, but artists and creators are worried. When they see Sora, they’re like, “Holy shit.”
Sam Altman
Sure. Artists were also super worried when photography came out and then photography became a new art form and people made a lot of money taking pictures. I think things like that will keep happening. People will use the new tools in new ways.
Sure. Artists were also super worried when photography came out and then photography became a new art form and people made a lot of money taking pictures. I think things like that will keep happening. People will use the new tools in new ways.
Lex Fridman
If we just look on YouTube or something like this, how much of that will be using Sora like AI generated content, do you think, in the next five years?
If we just look on YouTube or something like this, how much of that will be using Sora like AI generated content, do you think, in the next five years?
Sam Altman
People talk about how many jobs is AI going to do in five years. The framework that people have is, what percentage of current jobs are just going to be totally replaced by some AI doing the job? The way I think about it is not what percent of jobs AI will do, but what percent of tasks will AI do on over one time horizon. So if you think of all of the five-second tasks in the economy, five minute tasks, the five-hour tasks, maybe even the five-day tasks, how many of those can AI do? I think that’s a way more interesting, impactful, important question than how many jobs AI can do because it is a tool that will work at increasing levels of sophistication and over longer and longer time horizons for more and more tasks and let people operate at a higher level of abstraction. So maybe people are way more efficient at the job they do. And at some point that’s not just a quantitative change, but it’s a qualitative one too about the kinds of problems you can keep in your head. I think that for videos on YouTube it’ll be the same. Many videos, maybe most of them, will use AI tools in the production, but they’ll still be fundamentally driven by a person thinking about it, putting it together, doing parts of it. Sort of directing and running it.
People talk about how many jobs is AI going to do in five years. The framework that people have is, what percentage of current jobs are just going to be totally replaced by some AI doing the job? The way I think about it is not what percent of jobs AI will do, but what percent of tasks will AI do on over one time horizon. So if you think of all of the five-second tasks in the economy, five minute tasks, the five-hour tasks, maybe even the five-day tasks, how many of those can AI do? I think that’s a way more interesting, impactful, important question than how many jobs AI can do because it is a tool that will work at increasing levels of sophistication and over longer and longer time horizons for more and more tasks and let people operate at a higher level of abstraction. So maybe people are way more efficient at the job they do. And at some point that’s not just a quantitative change, but it’s a qualitative one too about the kinds of problems you can keep in your head. I think that for videos on YouTube it’ll be the same. Many videos, maybe most of them, will use AI tools in the production, but they’ll still be fundamentally driven by a person thinking about it, putting it together, doing parts of it. Sort of directing and running it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s so interesting. I mean it’s scary, but it’s interesting to think about. I tend to believe that humans like to watch other humans or other human humans-
Yeah, it’s so interesting. I mean it’s scary, but it’s interesting to think about. I tend to believe that humans like to watch other humans or other human humans-
Sam Altman
Humans really care about other humans a lot.
Humans really care about other humans a lot.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. If there’s a cooler thing that’s better than a human, humans care about that for two days and then they go back to humans.
Yeah. If there’s a cooler thing that’s better than a human, humans care about that for two days and then they go back to humans.
Sam Altman
That seems very deeply wired.
That seems very deeply wired.
Lex Fridman
It’s the whole chess thing, “Oh, yeah,” but now let’s everybody keep playing chess. And let’s ignore the elephant in the room that humans are really bad at chess relative to AI systems.
It’s the whole chess thing, “Oh, yeah,” but now let’s everybody keep playing chess. And let’s ignore the elephant in the room that humans are really bad at chess relative to AI systems.
Sam Altman
We still run races and cars are much faster. I mean there’s a lot of examples.
We still run races and cars are much faster. I mean there’s a lot of examples.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. And maybe it’ll just be tooling in the Adobe suite type of way where it can just make videos much easier and all that kind of stuff.
Yeah. And maybe it’ll just be tooling in the Adobe suite type of way where it can just make videos much easier and all that kind of stuff.
Listen, I hate being in front of the camera. If I can figure out a way to not be in front of the camera, I would love it. Unfortunately, it’ll take a while. That generating faces, it is getting there, but generating faces in video format is tricky when it’s specific people versus generic people.
GPT-4
Let me ask you about GPT-4. There’s so many questions. First of all, also amazing. Looking back, it’ll probably be this kind of historic pivotal moment with 3, 5 and 4 which ChatGPT.
Sam Altman
Maybe five will be the pivotal moment. I don’t know. Hard to say that looking forward.
Maybe five will be the pivotal moment. I don’t know. Hard to say that looking forward.
Lex Fridman
We’ll never know. That’s the annoying thing about the future, it’s hard to predict. But for me, looking back, GPT-4, ChatGPT is pretty damn impressive, historically impressive. So allow me to ask, what’s been the most impressive capabilities of GPT-4 to you and GPT-4 Turbo?
We’ll never know. That’s the annoying thing about the future, it’s hard to predict. But for me, looking back, GPT-4, ChatGPT is pretty damn impressive, historically impressive. So allow me to ask, what’s been the most impressive capabilities of GPT-4 to you and GPT-4 Turbo?
Sam Altman
I think it kind of sucks.
I think it kind of sucks.
Lex Fridman
Typical human also, gotten used to an awesome thing.
Typical human also, gotten used to an awesome thing.
Sam Altman
No, I think it is an amazing thing, but relative to where we need to get to and where I believe we will get to, at the time of GPT-3, people are like, “Oh, this is amazing. This is marvel of technology.” And it is, it was. But now we have GPT-4 and look at GPT-3 and you’re like, “That’s unimaginably horrible.” I expect that the delta between 5 and 4 will be the same as between 4 and 3 and I think it is our job to live a few years in the future and remember that the tools we have now are going to kind of suck looking backwards at them and that’s how we make sure the future is better.
No, I think it is an amazing thing, but relative to where we need to get to and where I believe we will get to, at the time of GPT-3, people are like, “Oh, this is amazing. This is marvel of technology.” And it is, it was. But now we have GPT-4 and look at GPT-3 and you’re like, “That’s unimaginably horrible.” I expect that the delta between 5 and 4 will be the same as between 4 and 3 and I think it is our job to live a few years in the future and remember that the tools we have now are going to kind of suck looking backwards at them and that’s how we make sure the future is better.
Lex Fridman
What are the most glorious ways in that GPT-4 sucks? Meaning-
What are the most glorious ways in that GPT-4 sucks? Meaning-
Sam Altman
What are the best things it can do?
What are the best things it can do?
Lex Fridman
What are the best things it can do and the limits of those best things that allow you to say it sucks, therefore gives you an inspiration and hope for the future?
What are the best things it can do and the limits of those best things that allow you to say it sucks, therefore gives you an inspiration and hope for the future?
Sam Altman
One thing I’ve been using it for more recently is sort of like a brainstorming partner.
One thing I’ve been using it for more recently is sort of like a brainstorming partner.
Lex Fridman
Yep, [inaudible 00:46:25] for that.
Yep, [inaudible 00:46:25] for that.
Sam Altman
There’s a glimmer of something amazing in there. When people talk about it, what it does, they’re like, “Oh, it helps me code more productively. It helps me write more faster and better. It helps me translate from this language to another,” all these amazing things, but there’s something about the kind of creative brainstorming partner, “I need to come up with a name for this thing. I need to think about this problem in a different way. I’m not sure what to do here,” that I think gives a glimpse of something I hope to see more of.
There’s a glimmer of something amazing in there. When people talk about it, what it does, they’re like, “Oh, it helps me code more productively. It helps me write more faster and better. It helps me translate from this language to another,” all these amazing things, but there’s something about the kind of creative brainstorming partner, “I need to come up with a name for this thing. I need to think about this problem in a different way. I’m not sure what to do here,” that I think gives a glimpse of something I hope to see more of.
One of the other things that you can see a very small glimpse of is when I can help on longer horizon tasks, break down something in multiple steps, maybe execute some of those steps, search the internet, write code, whatever, put that together. When that works, which is not very often, it’s very magical.
Lex Fridman
The iterative back and forth with a human, it works a lot for me. What do you mean it-
The iterative back and forth with a human, it works a lot for me. What do you mean it-
Sam Altman
Iterative back and forth to human, it can get more often when it can go do a 10 step problem on its own.
Iterative back and forth to human, it can get more often when it can go do a 10 step problem on its own.
Lex Fridman
Oh.
Oh.
Sam Altman
It doesn’t work for that too often, sometimes.
It doesn’t work for that too often, sometimes.
Lex Fridman
Add multiple layers of abstraction or do you mean just sequential?
Add multiple layers of abstraction or do you mean just sequential?
Sam Altman
Both, to break it down and then do things that different layers of abstraction to put them together. Look, I don’t want to downplay the accomplishment of GPT-4, but I don’t want to overstate it either. And I think this point that we are on an exponential curve, we’ll look back relatively soon at GPT-4 like we look back at GPT-3 now.
Both, to break it down and then do things that different layers of abstraction to put them together. Look, I don’t want to downplay the accomplishment of GPT-4, but I don’t want to overstate it either. And I think this point that we are on an exponential curve, we’ll look back relatively soon at GPT-4 like we look back at GPT-3 now.
Lex Fridman
That said, I mean ChatGPT was a transition to where people started to believe there is an uptick of believing, not internally at OpenAI.
That said, I mean ChatGPT was a transition to where people started to believe there is an uptick of believing, not internally at OpenAI.
Sam Altman
For sure.
For sure.
Lex Fridman
Perhaps there’s believers here, but when you think of-
Perhaps there’s believers here, but when you think of-
Sam Altman
And in that sense, I do think it’ll be a moment where a lot of the world went from not believing to believing. That was more about the ChatGPT interface. And by the interface and product, I also mean the post training of the model and how we tune it to be helpful to you and how to use it than the underlying model itself.
And in that sense, I do think it’ll be a moment where a lot of the world went from not believing to believing. That was more about the ChatGPT interface. And by the interface and product, I also mean the post training of the model and how we tune it to be helpful to you and how to use it than the underlying model itself.
Lex Fridman
How much of each of those things are important? The underlying model and the RLHF or something of that nature that tunes it to be more compelling to the human, more effective and productive for the human.
How much of each of those things are important? The underlying model and the RLHF or something of that nature that tunes it to be more compelling to the human, more effective and productive for the human.
Sam Altman
I mean they’re both super important, but the RLHF, the post-training step, the little wrapper of things that from a compute perspective, little wrapper of things that we do on top of the base model even though it’s a huge amount of work, that’s really important to say nothing of the product that we build around it. In some sense, we did have to do two things. We had to invent the underlying technology and then we had to figure out how to make it into a product people would love, which is not just about the actual product work itself, but this whole other step of how you align it and make it useful.
I mean they’re both super important, but the RLHF, the post-training step, the little wrapper of things that from a compute perspective, little wrapper of things that we do on top of the base model even though it’s a huge amount of work, that’s really important to say nothing of the product that we build around it. In some sense, we did have to do two things. We had to invent the underlying technology and then we had to figure out how to make it into a product people would love, which is not just about the actual product work itself, but this whole other step of how you align it and make it useful.
Lex Fridman
And how you make the scale work where a lot of people can use it at the same time. All that kind of stuff.
And how you make the scale work where a lot of people can use it at the same time. All that kind of stuff.
Sam Altman
And that. But that was a known difficult thing. We knew we were going to have to scale it up. We had to go do two things that had never been done before that were both I would say quite significant achievements and then a lot of things like scaling it up that other companies have had to do before.
And that. But that was a known difficult thing. We knew we were going to have to scale it up. We had to go do two things that had never been done before that were both I would say quite significant achievements and then a lot of things like scaling it up that other companies have had to do before.
Lex Fridman
How does the context window of going from 8K to 128K tokens compare from GPT-4 to GPT-4 Turbo?
How does the context window of going from 8K to 128K tokens compare from GPT-4 to GPT-4 Turbo?
Sam Altman
Most people don’t need all the way to 128 most of the time. Although if we dream into the distant future, we’ll have way distant future, we’ll have context length of several billion. You will feed in all of your information, all of your history over time and it’ll just get to know you better and better and that’ll be great. For now, the way people use these models, they’re not doing that. People sometimes post in a paper or a significant fraction of a code repository, whatever, but most usage of the models is not using the long context most of the time.
Most people don’t need all the way to 128 most of the time. Although if we dream into the distant future, we’ll have way distant future, we’ll have context length of several billion. You will feed in all of your information, all of your history over time and it’ll just get to know you better and better and that’ll be great. For now, the way people use these models, they’re not doing that. People sometimes post in a paper or a significant fraction of a code repository, whatever, but most usage of the models is not using the long context most of the time.
Lex Fridman
I like that this is your “I have a dream” speech. One day you’ll be judged by the full context of your character or of your whole lifetime. That’s interesting. So that’s part of the expansion that you’re hoping for, is a greater and greater context.
I like that this is your “I have a dream” speech. One day you’ll be judged by the full context of your character or of your whole lifetime. That’s interesting. So that’s part of the expansion that you’re hoping for, is a greater and greater context.
Sam Altman
I saw this internet clip once, I’m going to get the numbers wrong, but it was like Bill Gates talking about the amount of memory on some early computer, maybe it was 64K, maybe 640K, something like that. Most of it was used for the screen buffer. He just couldn’t seem genuine. He just couldn’t imagine that the world would eventually need gigabytes of memory in a computer or terabytes of memory in a computer. And you always do, or you always do just need to follow the exponential of technology and we will find out how to use better technology. So I can’t really imagine what it’s like right now for context links to go out to the billion someday. And they might not literally go there, but effectively it’ll feel like that. But I know we’ll use it and really not want to go back once we have it.
I saw this internet clip once, I’m going to get the numbers wrong, but it was like Bill Gates talking about the amount of memory on some early computer, maybe it was 64K, maybe 640K, something like that. Most of it was used for the screen buffer. He just couldn’t seem genuine. He just couldn’t imagine that the world would eventually need gigabytes of memory in a computer or terabytes of memory in a computer. And you always do, or you always do just need to follow the exponential of technology and we will find out how to use better technology. So I can’t really imagine what it’s like right now for context links to go out to the billion someday. And they might not literally go there, but effectively it’ll feel like that. But I know we’ll use it and really not want to go back once we have it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, even saying billions 10 years from now might seem dumb because it’ll be trillions upon trillions.
Yeah, even saying billions 10 years from now might seem dumb because it’ll be trillions upon trillions.
Sam Altman
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
There’ll be some kind of breakthrough that will effectively feel like infinite context. But even 120, I have to be honest, I haven’t pushed it to that degree. Maybe putting in entire books or parts of books and so on, papers. What are some interesting use cases of GPT-4 that you’ve seen?
There’ll be some kind of breakthrough that will effectively feel like infinite context. But even 120, I have to be honest, I haven’t pushed it to that degree. Maybe putting in entire books or parts of books and so on, papers. What are some interesting use cases of GPT-4 that you’ve seen?
Sam Altman
The thing that I find most interesting is not any particular use case that we can talk about those, but it’s people who kind of like, this is mostly younger people, but people who use it as their default start for any kind of knowledge work task. And it’s the fact that it can do a lot of things reasonably well. You can use GPT-V, you can use it to help you write code, you can use it to help you do search, you can use it to edit a paper. The most interesting thing to me is the people who just use it as the start of their workflow.
The thing that I find most interesting is not any particular use case that we can talk about those, but it’s people who kind of like, this is mostly younger people, but people who use it as their default start for any kind of knowledge work task. And it’s the fact that it can do a lot of things reasonably well. You can use GPT-V, you can use it to help you write code, you can use it to help you do search, you can use it to edit a paper. The most interesting thing to me is the people who just use it as the start of their workflow.
Lex Fridman
I do as well for many things. I use it as a reading partner for reading books. It helps me think, help me think through ideas, especially when the books are classic. So it’s really well written about. I find it often to be significantly better than even Wikipedia on well-covered topics. It’s somehow more balanced and more nuanced. Or maybe it’s me, but it inspires me to think deeper than a Wikipedia article does. I’m not exactly sure what that is.
I do as well for many things. I use it as a reading partner for reading books. It helps me think, help me think through ideas, especially when the books are classic. So it’s really well written about. I find it often to be significantly better than even Wikipedia on well-covered topics. It’s somehow more balanced and more nuanced. Or maybe it’s me, but it inspires me to think deeper than a Wikipedia article does. I’m not exactly sure what that is.
You mentioned this collaboration. I’m not sure where the magic is, if it’s in here or if it’s in there or if it’s somewhere in between. I’m not sure. But one of the things that concerns me for knowledge task when I start with GPT is I’ll usually have to do fact checking after, like check that it didn’t come up with fake stuff. How do you figure that out that GPT can come up with fake stuff that sounds really convincing? So how do you ground it in truth?
Sam Altman
That’s obviously an area of intense interest for us. I think it’s going to get a lot better with upcoming versions, but we’ll have to continue to work on it and we’re not going to have it all solved this year.
That’s obviously an area of intense interest for us. I think it’s going to get a lot better with upcoming versions, but we’ll have to continue to work on it and we’re not going to have it all solved this year.
Lex Fridman
Well the scary thing is, as it gets better, you’ll start not doing the fact checking more and more, right?
Well the scary thing is, as it gets better, you’ll start not doing the fact checking more and more, right?
Sam Altman
I’m of two minds about that. I think people are much more sophisticated users of technology than we often give them credit for.
I’m of two minds about that. I think people are much more sophisticated users of technology than we often give them credit for.
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
Sam Altman
And people seem to really understand that GPT, any of these models hallucinate some of the time. And if it’s mission-critical, you got to check it.
And people seem to really understand that GPT, any of these models hallucinate some of the time. And if it’s mission-critical, you got to check it.
Lex Fridman
Except journalists don’t seem to understand that. I’ve seen journalists half-assedly just using GPT-4. It’s-
Except journalists don’t seem to understand that. I’ve seen journalists half-assedly just using GPT-4. It’s-
Sam Altman
Of the long list of things I’d like to dunk on journalists for, this is not my top criticism of them.
Of the long list of things I’d like to dunk on journalists for, this is not my top criticism of them.
Lex Fridman
Well, I think the bigger criticism is perhaps the pressures and the incentives of being a journalist is that you have to work really quickly and this is a shortcut.I would love our society to incentivize like-
Well, I think the bigger criticism is perhaps the pressures and the incentives of being a journalist is that you have to work really quickly and this is a shortcut.I would love our society to incentivize like-
Sam Altman
I would too.
I would too.
Lex Fridman
… like a journalistic efforts that take days and weeks and rewards great in depth journalism. Also journalism that present stuff in a balanced way where it’s like celebrates people while criticizing them even though the criticism is the thing that gets clicks and making shit up also gets clicks and headlines that mischaracterized completely. I’m sure you have a lot of people dunking on, “Well, all that drama probably got a lot of clicks.”
… like a journalistic efforts that take days and weeks and rewards great in depth journalism. Also journalism that present stuff in a balanced way where it’s like celebrates people while criticizing them even though the criticism is the thing that gets clicks and making shit up also gets clicks and headlines that mischaracterized completely. I’m sure you have a lot of people dunking on, “Well, all that drama probably got a lot of clicks.”
Sam Altman
Probably did.
Probably did.
Memory & privacy
Lex Fridman
And that’s a bigger problem about human civilization I’d love to see-saw. This is where we celebrate a bit more. You’ve given ChatGPT the ability to have memories. You’ve been playing with that about previous conversations. And also the ability to turn off memory. I wish I could do that sometimes. Just turn on and off, depending. I guess sometimes alcohol can do that, but not optimally I suppose. What have you seen through that, like playing around with that idea of remembering conversations and not…
And that’s a bigger problem about human civilization I’d love to see-saw. This is where we celebrate a bit more. You’ve given ChatGPT the ability to have memories. You’ve been playing with that about previous conversations. And also the ability to turn off memory. I wish I could do that sometimes. Just turn on and off, depending. I guess sometimes alcohol can do that, but not optimally I suppose. What have you seen through that, like playing around with that idea of remembering conversations and not…
Sam Altman
We’re very early in our explorations here, but I think what people want, or at least what I want for myself, is a model that gets to know me and gets more useful to me over time. This is an early exploration. I think there’s a lot of other things to do, but that’s where we’d like to head. You’d like to use a model, and over the course of your life or use a system, it’d be many models, and over the course of your life it gets better and better.
We’re very early in our explorations here, but I think what people want, or at least what I want for myself, is a model that gets to know me and gets more useful to me over time. This is an early exploration. I think there’s a lot of other things to do, but that’s where we’d like to head. You’d like to use a model, and over the course of your life or use a system, it’d be many models, and over the course of your life it gets better and better.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. How hard is that problem? Because right now it’s more like remembering little factoids and preferences and so on. What about remembering? Don’t you want GPT to remember all the shit you went through in November and all the drama and then you can-
Yeah. How hard is that problem? Because right now it’s more like remembering little factoids and preferences and so on. What about remembering? Don’t you want GPT to remember all the shit you went through in November and all the drama and then you can-
Sam Altman
Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Because right now you’re clearly blocking it out a little bit.
Because right now you’re clearly blocking it out a little bit.
Sam Altman
It’s not just that I want it to remember that. I want it to integrate the lessons of that and remind me in the future what to do differently or what to watch out for. We all gain from experience over the course of our lives in varying degrees, and I’d like my AI agent to gain with that experience too. So if we go back and let ourselves imagine that trillions and trillions of context length, if I can put every conversation I’ve ever had with anybody in my life in there, if I can have all of my emails input out, all of my input output in the context window every time I ask a question, that’d be pretty cool I think.
It’s not just that I want it to remember that. I want it to integrate the lessons of that and remind me in the future what to do differently or what to watch out for. We all gain from experience over the course of our lives in varying degrees, and I’d like my AI agent to gain with that experience too. So if we go back and let ourselves imagine that trillions and trillions of context length, if I can put every conversation I’ve ever had with anybody in my life in there, if I can have all of my emails input out, all of my input output in the context window every time I ask a question, that’d be pretty cool I think.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I think that would be very cool. People sometimes will hear that and be concerned about privacy. What do you think about that aspect of it, the more effective the AI becomes that really integrating all the experiences and all the data that happened to you and give you advice?
Yeah, I think that would be very cool. People sometimes will hear that and be concerned about privacy. What do you think about that aspect of it, the more effective the AI becomes that really integrating all the experiences and all the data that happened to you and give you advice?
Sam Altman
I think the right answer there is just user choice. Anything I want stricken from the record from my AI agent, I want to be able to take out. If I don’t want to remember anything, I want that too. You and I may have different opinions about where on that privacy utility trade off for our own AI-
I think the right answer there is just user choice. Anything I want stricken from the record from my AI agent, I want to be able to take out. If I don’t want to remember anything, I want that too. You and I may have different opinions about where on that privacy utility trade off for our own AI-
Sam Altman
…opinions about where on that privacy/utility trade-off for OpenAI going to be, which is totally fine. But I think the answer is just really easy user choice.
…opinions about where on that privacy/utility trade-off for OpenAI going to be, which is totally fine. But I think the answer is just really easy user choice.
Lex Fridman
But there should be some high level of transparency from a company about the user choice. Because sometimes companies in the past have been kind of shady about, “Eh, it’s kind of presumed that we’re collecting all your data. We’re using it for a good reason, for advertisement and so on.” But there’s not a transparency about the details of that.
But there should be some high level of transparency from a company about the user choice. Because sometimes companies in the past have been kind of shady about, “Eh, it’s kind of presumed that we’re collecting all your data. We’re using it for a good reason, for advertisement and so on.” But there’s not a transparency about the details of that.
Sam Altman
That’s totally true. You mentioned earlier that I’m blocking out the November stuff.
That’s totally true. You mentioned earlier that I’m blocking out the November stuff.
Lex Fridman
Just teasing you.
Just teasing you.
Sam Altman
Well, I mean, I think it was a very traumatic thing and it did immobilize me for a long period of time. Definitely the hardest work thing I’ve had to do was just keep working that period, because I had to try to come back in here and put the pieces together while I was just in shock and pain, and nobody really cares about that. I mean, the team gave me a pass and I was not working at my normal level. But there was a period where it was really hard to have to do both. But I kind of woke up one morning, and I was like, “This was a horrible thing that happened to me. I think I could just feel like a victim forever, or I can say this is the most important work I’ll ever touch in my life and I need to get back to it.” And it doesn’t mean that I’ve repressed it, because sometimes I wake up in the middle of the night thinking about it, but I do feel an obligation to keep moving forward.
Well, I mean, I think it was a very traumatic thing and it did immobilize me for a long period of time. Definitely the hardest work thing I’ve had to do was just keep working that period, because I had to try to come back in here and put the pieces together while I was just in shock and pain, and nobody really cares about that. I mean, the team gave me a pass and I was not working at my normal level. But there was a period where it was really hard to have to do both. But I kind of woke up one morning, and I was like, “This was a horrible thing that happened to me. I think I could just feel like a victim forever, or I can say this is the most important work I’ll ever touch in my life and I need to get back to it.” And it doesn’t mean that I’ve repressed it, because sometimes I wake up in the middle of the night thinking about it, but I do feel an obligation to keep moving forward.
Lex Fridman
Well, that’s beautifully said, but there could be some lingering stuff in there. Like, what I would be concerned about is that trust thing that you mentioned, that being paranoid about people as opposed to just trusting everybody or most people, like using your gut. It’s a tricky dance.
Well, that’s beautifully said, but there could be some lingering stuff in there. Like, what I would be concerned about is that trust thing that you mentioned, that being paranoid about people as opposed to just trusting everybody or most people, like using your gut. It’s a tricky dance.
Sam Altman
For sure.
For sure.
Lex Fridman
I mean, because I’ve seen in my part-time explorations, I’ve been diving deeply into the Zelenskyy administration and the Putin administration and the dynamics there in wartime in a very highly stressful environment. And what happens is distrust, and you isolate yourself, both, and you start to not see the world clearly. And that’s a human concern. You seem to have taken it in stride and kind of learned the good lessons and felt the love and let the love energize you, which is great, but still can linger in there. There’s just some questions I would love to ask, your intuition about what’s GPT able to do and not. So it’s allocating approximately the same amount of compute for each token it generates. Is there room there in this kind of approach to slower thinking, sequential thinking?
I mean, because I’ve seen in my part-time explorations, I’ve been diving deeply into the Zelenskyy administration and the Putin administration and the dynamics there in wartime in a very highly stressful environment. And what happens is distrust, and you isolate yourself, both, and you start to not see the world clearly. And that’s a human concern. You seem to have taken it in stride and kind of learned the good lessons and felt the love and let the love energize you, which is great, but still can linger in there. There’s just some questions I would love to ask, your intuition about what’s GPT able to do and not. So it’s allocating approximately the same amount of compute for each token it generates. Is there room there in this kind of approach to slower thinking, sequential thinking?
Sam Altman
I think there will be a new paradigm for that kind of thinking.
I think there will be a new paradigm for that kind of thinking.
Lex Fridman
Will it be similar architecturally as what we’re seeing now with LLMs? Is it a layer on top of LLMs?
Will it be similar architecturally as what we’re seeing now with LLMs? Is it a layer on top of LLMs?
Sam Altman
I can imagine many ways to implement that. I think that’s less important than the question you were getting at, which is, do we need a way to do a slower kind of thinking, where the answer doesn’t have to get… I guess spiritually you could say that you want an AI to be able to think harder about a harder problem and answer more quickly about an easier problem. And I think that will be important.
I can imagine many ways to implement that. I think that’s less important than the question you were getting at, which is, do we need a way to do a slower kind of thinking, where the answer doesn’t have to get… I guess spiritually you could say that you want an AI to be able to think harder about a harder problem and answer more quickly about an easier problem. And I think that will be important.
Lex Fridman
Is that like a human thought that we just have and you should be able to think hard? Is that wrong intuition?
Is that like a human thought that we just have and you should be able to think hard? Is that wrong intuition?
Sam Altman
I suspect that’s a reasonable intuition.
I suspect that’s a reasonable intuition.
Lex Fridman
Interesting. So it’s not possible once the GPT gets like GPT-7, would just instantaneously be able to see, “Here’s the proof of Fermat’s Theorem”?
Interesting. So it’s not possible once the GPT gets like GPT-7, would just instantaneously be able to see, “Here’s the proof of Fermat’s Theorem”?
Sam Altman
It seems to me like you want to be able to allocate more compute to harder problems. It seems to me that if you ask a system like that, “Prove Fermat’s Last Theorem,” versus, “What’s today’s date?,” unless it already knew and and had memorized the answer to the proof, assuming it’s got to go figure that out, seems like that will take more compute.
It seems to me like you want to be able to allocate more compute to harder problems. It seems to me that if you ask a system like that, “Prove Fermat’s Last Theorem,” versus, “What’s today’s date?,” unless it already knew and and had memorized the answer to the proof, assuming it’s got to go figure that out, seems like that will take more compute.
Lex Fridman
But can it look like basically an LLM talking to itself, that kind of thing?
But can it look like basically an LLM talking to itself, that kind of thing?
Sam Altman
Maybe. I mean, there’s a lot of things that you could imagine working. What the right or the best way to do that will be, we don’t know.
Maybe. I mean, there’s a lot of things that you could imagine working. What the right or the best way to do that will be, we don’t know.
Q*
Lex Fridman
This does make me think of the mysterious lore behind Q*. What’s this mysterious Q* project? Is it also in the same nuclear facility?
This does make me think of the mysterious lore behind Q*. What’s this mysterious Q* project? Is it also in the same nuclear facility?
Sam Altman
There is no nuclear facility.
There is no nuclear facility.
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm. That’s what a person with a nuclear facility always says.
Mm-hmm. That’s what a person with a nuclear facility always says.
Sam Altman
I would love to have a secret nuclear facility. There isn’t one.
I would love to have a secret nuclear facility. There isn’t one.
Lex Fridman
All right.
All right.
Sam Altman
Maybe someday.
Maybe someday.
Lex Fridman
Someday? All right. One can dream.
Someday? All right. One can dream.
Sam Altman
OpenAI is not a good company at keeping secrets. It would be nice. We’re like, been plagued by a lot of leaks, and it would be nice if we were able to have something like that.
OpenAI is not a good company at keeping secrets. It would be nice. We’re like, been plagued by a lot of leaks, and it would be nice if we were able to have something like that.
Lex Fridman
Can you speak to what Q* is?
Can you speak to what Q* is?
Sam Altman
We are not ready to talk about that.
We are not ready to talk about that.
Lex Fridman
See, but an answer like that means there’s something to talk about. It’s very mysterious, Sam.
See, but an answer like that means there’s something to talk about. It’s very mysterious, Sam.
Sam Altman
I mean, we work on all kinds of research. We have said for a while that we think better reasoning in these systems is an important direction that we’d like to pursue. We haven’t cracked the code yet. We’re very interested in it.
I mean, we work on all kinds of research. We have said for a while that we think better reasoning in these systems is an important direction that we’d like to pursue. We haven’t cracked the code yet. We’re very interested in it.
Lex Fridman
Is there going to be moments, Q* or otherwise, where there’s going to be leaps similar to ChatGPT, where you’re like…
Is there going to be moments, Q* or otherwise, where there’s going to be leaps similar to ChatGPT, where you’re like…
Sam Altman
That’s a good question. What do I think about that? It’s interesting. To me, it all feels pretty continuous.
That’s a good question. What do I think about that? It’s interesting. To me, it all feels pretty continuous.
Lex Fridman
Right. This is kind of a theme that you’re saying, is you’re basically gradually going up an exponential slope. But from an outsider’s perspective, from me just watching, it does feel like there’s leaps. But to you, there isn’t?
Right. This is kind of a theme that you’re saying, is you’re basically gradually going up an exponential slope. But from an outsider’s perspective, from me just watching, it does feel like there’s leaps. But to you, there isn’t?
Sam Altman
I do wonder if we should have… So part of the reason that we deploy the way we do, we call it iterative deployment, rather than go build in secret until we got all the way to GPT-5, we decided to talk about GPT-1, 2, 3, and 4. And part of the reason there is I think AI and surprise don’t go together. And also the world, people, institutions, whatever you want to call it, need time to adapt and think about these things. And I think one of the best things that OpenAI has done is this strategy, and we get the world to pay attention to the progress, to take AGI seriously, to think about what systems and structures and governance we want in place before we’re under the gun and have to make a rush decision.
I do wonder if we should have… So part of the reason that we deploy the way we do, we call it iterative deployment, rather than go build in secret until we got all the way to GPT-5, we decided to talk about GPT-1, 2, 3, and 4. And part of the reason there is I think AI and surprise don’t go together. And also the world, people, institutions, whatever you want to call it, need time to adapt and think about these things. And I think one of the best things that OpenAI has done is this strategy, and we get the world to pay attention to the progress, to take AGI seriously, to think about what systems and structures and governance we want in place before we’re under the gun and have to make a rush decision.
I think that’s really good. But the fact that people like you and others say you still feel like there are these leaps makes me think that maybe we should be doing our releasing even more iteratively. And I don’t know what that would mean, I don’t have an answer ready to go, but our goal is not to have shock updates to the world. The opposite.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, for sure. More iterative would be amazing. I think that’s just beautiful for everybody.
Yeah, for sure. More iterative would be amazing. I think that’s just beautiful for everybody.
Sam Altman
But that’s what we’re trying to do, that’s our stated strategy, and I think we’re somehow missing the mark. So maybe we should think about releasing GPT-5 in a different way or something like that.
But that’s what we’re trying to do, that’s our stated strategy, and I think we’re somehow missing the mark. So maybe we should think about releasing GPT-5 in a different way or something like that.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, 4.71, 4.72. But people tend to like to celebrate, people celebrate birthdays. I don’t know if you know humans, but they kind of have these milestones and those things.
Yeah, 4.71, 4.72. But people tend to like to celebrate, people celebrate birthdays. I don’t know if you know humans, but they kind of have these milestones and those things.
Sam Altman
I do know some humans. People do like milestones. I totally get that. I think we like milestones too. It’s fun to declare victory on this one and go start the next thing. But yeah, I feel like we’re somehow getting this a little bit wrong.
I do know some humans. People do like milestones. I totally get that. I think we like milestones too. It’s fun to declare victory on this one and go start the next thing. But yeah, I feel like we’re somehow getting this a little bit wrong.
GPT-5
Lex Fridman
So when is GPT-5 coming out again?
So when is GPT-5 coming out again?
Sam Altman
I don’t know. That’s the honest answer.
I don’t know. That’s the honest answer.
Lex Fridman
Oh, that’s the honest answer. Blink twice if it’s this year.
Oh, that’s the honest answer. Blink twice if it’s this year.
Sam Altman
We will release an amazing new model this year. I don’t know what we’ll call it.
We will release an amazing new model this year. I don’t know what we’ll call it.
Lex Fridman
So that goes to the question of, what’s the way we release this thing?
So that goes to the question of, what’s the way we release this thing?
Sam Altman
We’ll release in the coming months many different things. I think that’d be very cool. I think before we talk about a GPT-5-like model called that, or not called that, or a little bit worse or a little bit better than what you’d expect from a GPT-5, I think we have a lot of other important things to release first.
We’ll release in the coming months many different things. I think that’d be very cool. I think before we talk about a GPT-5-like model called that, or not called that, or a little bit worse or a little bit better than what you’d expect from a GPT-5, I think we have a lot of other important things to release first.
Lex Fridman
I don’t know what to expect from GPT-5. You’re making me nervous and excited. What are some of the biggest challenges and bottlenecks to overcome for whatever it ends up being called, but let’s call it GPT-5? Just interesting to ask. Is it on the compute side? Is it on the technical side?
I don’t know what to expect from GPT-5. You’re making me nervous and excited. What are some of the biggest challenges and bottlenecks to overcome for whatever it ends up being called, but let’s call it GPT-5? Just interesting to ask. Is it on the compute side? Is it on the technical side?
Sam Altman
It’s always all of these. You know, what’s the one big unlock? Is it a bigger computer? Is it a new secret? Is it something else? It’s all of these things together. The thing that OpenAI, I think, does really well… This is actually an original Ilya quote that I’m going to butcher, but it’s something like, “We multiply 200 medium-sized things together into one giant thing.”
It’s always all of these. You know, what’s the one big unlock? Is it a bigger computer? Is it a new secret? Is it something else? It’s all of these things together. The thing that OpenAI, I think, does really well… This is actually an original Ilya quote that I’m going to butcher, but it’s something like, “We multiply 200 medium-sized things together into one giant thing.”
Lex Fridman
So there’s this distributed constant innovation happening?
So there’s this distributed constant innovation happening?
Sam Altman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
So even on the technical side?
So even on the technical side?
Sam Altman
Especially on the technical side.
Especially on the technical side.
Lex Fridman
So even detailed approaches?
So even detailed approaches?
Sam Altman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Like you do detailed aspects of every… How does that work with different, disparate teams and so on? How do the medium-sized things become one whole giant Transformer?
Like you do detailed aspects of every… How does that work with different, disparate teams and so on? How do the medium-sized things become one whole giant Transformer?
Sam Altman
There’s a few people who have to think about putting the whole thing together, but a lot of people try to keep most of the picture in their head.
There’s a few people who have to think about putting the whole thing together, but a lot of people try to keep most of the picture in their head.
Lex Fridman
Oh, like the individual teams, individual contributors try to keep the bigger picture?
Oh, like the individual teams, individual contributors try to keep the bigger picture?
Sam Altman
At a high level, yeah. You don’t know exactly how every piece works, of course, but one thing I generally believe is that it’s sometimes useful to zoom out and look at the entire map. And I think this is true for a technical problem, I think this is true for innovating in business. But things come together in surprising ways, and having an understanding of that whole picture, even if most of the time you’re operating in the weeds in one area, pays off with surprising insights. In fact, one of the things that I used to have and was super valuable was I used to have a good map of all or most of the frontiers in the tech industry. And I could sometimes see these connections or new things that were possible that if I were only deep in one area, I wouldn’t be able to have the idea for because I wouldn’t have all the data. And I don’t really have that much anymore. I’m super deep now. But I know that it’s a valuable thing.
At a high level, yeah. You don’t know exactly how every piece works, of course, but one thing I generally believe is that it’s sometimes useful to zoom out and look at the entire map. And I think this is true for a technical problem, I think this is true for innovating in business. But things come together in surprising ways, and having an understanding of that whole picture, even if most of the time you’re operating in the weeds in one area, pays off with surprising insights. In fact, one of the things that I used to have and was super valuable was I used to have a good map of all or most of the frontiers in the tech industry. And I could sometimes see these connections or new things that were possible that if I were only deep in one area, I wouldn’t be able to have the idea for because I wouldn’t have all the data. And I don’t really have that much anymore. I’m super deep now. But I know that it’s a valuable thing.
Lex Fridman
You’re not the man you used to be, Sam.
You’re not the man you used to be, Sam.
Sam Altman
Very different job now than what I used to have.
Very different job now than what I used to have.
$7 trillion of compute
Lex Fridman
Speaking of zooming out, let’s zoom out to another cheeky thing, but profound thing, perhaps, that you said. You tweeted about needing $7 trillion.
Speaking of zooming out, let’s zoom out to another cheeky thing, but profound thing, perhaps, that you said. You tweeted about needing $7 trillion.
Sam Altman
I did not tweet about that. I never said, like, “We’re raising $7 trillion,” blah blah blah.
I did not tweet about that. I never said, like, “We’re raising $7 trillion,” blah blah blah.
Lex Fridman
Oh, that’s somebody else?
Oh, that’s somebody else?
Sam Altman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Oh, but you said, “Fuck it, maybe eight,” I think?
Oh, but you said, “Fuck it, maybe eight,” I think?
Sam Altman
Okay, I meme once there’s misinformation out in the world.
Okay, I meme once there’s misinformation out in the world.
Lex Fridman
Oh, you meme. But misinformation may have a foundation of insight there.
Oh, you meme. But misinformation may have a foundation of insight there.
Sam Altman
Look, I think compute is going to be the currency of the future. I think it will be maybe the most precious commodity in the world, and I think we should be investing heavily to make a lot more compute. Compute, I think it’s going to be an unusual market. People think about the market for chips for mobile phones or something like that. And you can say that, okay, there’s 8 billion people in the world, maybe 7 billion of them have phones, maybe 6 billion, let’s say. They upgrade every two years, so the market per year is 3 billion system-on-chip for smartphones. And if you make 30 billion, you will not sell 10 times as many phones, because most people have one phone.
Look, I think compute is going to be the currency of the future. I think it will be maybe the most precious commodity in the world, and I think we should be investing heavily to make a lot more compute. Compute, I think it’s going to be an unusual market. People think about the market for chips for mobile phones or something like that. And you can say that, okay, there’s 8 billion people in the world, maybe 7 billion of them have phones, maybe 6 billion, let’s say. They upgrade every two years, so the market per year is 3 billion system-on-chip for smartphones. And if you make 30 billion, you will not sell 10 times as many phones, because most people have one phone.
But compute is different. Intelligence is going to be more like energy or something like that, where the only thing that I think makes sense to talk about is, at price X, the world will use this much compute, and at price Y, the world will use this much compute. Because if it’s really cheap, I’ll have it reading my email all day, giving me suggestions about what I maybe should think about or work on, and trying to cure cancer, and if it’s really expensive, maybe I’ll only use it, or we’ll only use it, to try to cure cancer.
So I think the world is going to want a tremendous amount of compute. And there’s a lot of parts of that that are hard. Energy is the hardest part, building data centers is also hard, the supply chain is hard, and then of course, fabricating enough chips is hard. But this seems to be where things are going. We’re going to want an amount of compute that’s just hard to reason about right now.
Lex Fridman
How do you solve the energy puzzle? Nuclear-
How do you solve the energy puzzle? Nuclear-
Sam Altman
That’s what I believe.
That’s what I believe.
Lex Fridman
…fusion?
…fusion?
Sam Altman
That’s what I believe.
That’s what I believe.
Lex Fridman
Nuclear fusion?
Nuclear fusion?
Sam Altman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Who’s going to solve that?
Who’s going to solve that?
Sam Altman
I think Helion’s doing the best work, but I’m happy there’s a race for fusion right now. Nuclear fission, I think, is also quite amazing, and I hope as a world we can re-embrace that. It’s really sad to me how the history of that went, and hope we get back to it in a meaningful way.
I think Helion’s doing the best work, but I’m happy there’s a race for fusion right now. Nuclear fission, I think, is also quite amazing, and I hope as a world we can re-embrace that. It’s really sad to me how the history of that went, and hope we get back to it in a meaningful way.
Lex Fridman
So to you, part of the puzzle is nuclear fission? Like nuclear reactors as we currently have them? And a lot of people are terrified because of Chernobyl and so on?
So to you, part of the puzzle is nuclear fission? Like nuclear reactors as we currently have them? And a lot of people are terrified because of Chernobyl and so on?
Sam Altman
Well, I think we should make new reactors. I think it’s just a shame that industry kind of ground to a halt.
Well, I think we should make new reactors. I think it’s just a shame that industry kind of ground to a halt.
Lex Fridman
And just mass hysteria is how you explain the halt?
And just mass hysteria is how you explain the halt?
Sam Altman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
I don’t know if you know humans, but that’s one of the dangers. That’s one of the security threats for nuclear fission, is humans seem to be really afraid of it. And that’s something we’ll have to incorporate into the calculus of it, so we have to kind of win people over and to show how safe it is.
I don’t know if you know humans, but that’s one of the dangers. That’s one of the security threats for nuclear fission, is humans seem to be really afraid of it. And that’s something we’ll have to incorporate into the calculus of it, so we have to kind of win people over and to show how safe it is.
Sam Altman
I worry about that for AI. I think some things are going to go theatrically wrong with AI. I don’t know what the percent chance is that I eventually get shot, but it’s not zero.
I worry about that for AI. I think some things are going to go theatrically wrong with AI. I don’t know what the percent chance is that I eventually get shot, but it’s not zero.
Lex Fridman
Oh, like we want to stop this from-
Oh, like we want to stop this from-
Sam Altman
Maybe.
Maybe.
Lex Fridman
How do you decrease the theatrical nature of it? I’m already starting to hear rumblings, because I do talk to people on both sides of the political spectrum, hear rumblings where it’s going to be politicized. AI is going to be politicized, which really worries me, because then it’s like maybe the right is against AI and the left is for AI because it’s going to help the people, or whatever the narrative and the formulation is, that really worries me. And then the theatrical nature of it can be leveraged fully. How do you fight that?
How do you decrease the theatrical nature of it? I’m already starting to hear rumblings, because I do talk to people on both sides of the political spectrum, hear rumblings where it’s going to be politicized. AI is going to be politicized, which really worries me, because then it’s like maybe the right is against AI and the left is for AI because it’s going to help the people, or whatever the narrative and the formulation is, that really worries me. And then the theatrical nature of it can be leveraged fully. How do you fight that?
Sam Altman
I think it will get caught up in left versus right wars. I don’t know exactly what that’s going to look like, but I think that’s just what happens with anything of consequence, unfortunately. What I meant more about theatrical risks is AI’s going to have, I believe, tremendously more good consequences than bad ones, but it is going to have bad ones, and there’ll be some bad ones that are bad but not theatrical. A lot more people have died of air pollution than nuclear reactors, for example. But most people worry more about living next to a nuclear reactor than a coal plant. But something about the way we’re wired is that although there’s many different kinds of risks we have to confront, the ones that make a good climax scene of a movie carry much more weight with us than the ones that are very bad over a long period of time but on a slow burn.
I think it will get caught up in left versus right wars. I don’t know exactly what that’s going to look like, but I think that’s just what happens with anything of consequence, unfortunately. What I meant more about theatrical risks is AI’s going to have, I believe, tremendously more good consequences than bad ones, but it is going to have bad ones, and there’ll be some bad ones that are bad but not theatrical. A lot more people have died of air pollution than nuclear reactors, for example. But most people worry more about living next to a nuclear reactor than a coal plant. But something about the way we’re wired is that although there’s many different kinds of risks we have to confront, the ones that make a good climax scene of a movie carry much more weight with us than the ones that are very bad over a long period of time but on a slow burn.
Lex Fridman
Well, that’s why truth matters, and hopefully AI can help us see the truth of things, to have balance, to understand what are the actual risks, what are the actual dangers of things in the world. What are the pros and cons of the competition in the space and competing with Google, Meta, xAI, and others?
Well, that’s why truth matters, and hopefully AI can help us see the truth of things, to have balance, to understand what are the actual risks, what are the actual dangers of things in the world. What are the pros and cons of the competition in the space and competing with Google, Meta, xAI, and others?
Sam Altman
I think I have a pretty straightforward answer to this that maybe I can think of more nuance later, but the pros seem obvious, which is that we get better products and more innovation faster and cheaper, and all the reasons competition is good. And the con is that I think if we’re not careful, it could lead to an increase in sort of an arms race that I’m nervous about.
I think I have a pretty straightforward answer to this that maybe I can think of more nuance later, but the pros seem obvious, which is that we get better products and more innovation faster and cheaper, and all the reasons competition is good. And the con is that I think if we’re not careful, it could lead to an increase in sort of an arms race that I’m nervous about.
Lex Fridman
Do you feel the pressure of that arms race, like in some negative [inaudible 01:15:25]?
Do you feel the pressure of that arms race, like in some negative [inaudible 01:15:25]?
Sam Altman
Definitely in some ways, for sure. We spend a lot of time talking about the need to prioritize safety. And I’ve said for a long time that you think of a quadrant of slow timelines for the start of AGI, long timelines, and then a short takeoff or a fast takeoff. I think short timeline, slow takeoff is the safest quadrant and the one I’d most like us to be in. But I do want to make sure we get that slow takeoff.
Definitely in some ways, for sure. We spend a lot of time talking about the need to prioritize safety. And I’ve said for a long time that you think of a quadrant of slow timelines for the start of AGI, long timelines, and then a short takeoff or a fast takeoff. I think short timeline, slow takeoff is the safest quadrant and the one I’d most like us to be in. But I do want to make sure we get that slow takeoff.
Lex Fridman
Part of the problem I have with this kind of slight beef with Elon is that there’s silos created as opposed to collaboration on the safety aspect of all of this. It tends to go into silos and closed. Open source, perhaps, in the model.
Part of the problem I have with this kind of slight beef with Elon is that there’s silos created as opposed to collaboration on the safety aspect of all of this. It tends to go into silos and closed. Open source, perhaps, in the model.
Sam Altman
Elon says, at least, that he cares a great deal about AI safety and is really worried about it, and I assume that he’s not going to race unsafely.
Elon says, at least, that he cares a great deal about AI safety and is really worried about it, and I assume that he’s not going to race unsafely.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. But collaboration here, I think, is really beneficial for everybody on that front.
Yeah. But collaboration here, I think, is really beneficial for everybody on that front.
Sam Altman
Not really the thing he’s most known for.
Not really the thing he’s most known for.
Lex Fridman
Well, he is known for caring about humanity, and humanity benefits from collaboration, and so there’s always a tension in incentives and motivations. And in the end, I do hope humanity prevails.
Well, he is known for caring about humanity, and humanity benefits from collaboration, and so there’s always a tension in incentives and motivations. And in the end, I do hope humanity prevails.
Sam Altman
I was thinking, someone just reminded me the other day about how the day that he surpassed Jeff Bezos for richest person in the world, he tweeted a silver medal at Jeff Bezos. I hope we have less stuff like that as people start to work towards AGI.
I was thinking, someone just reminded me the other day about how the day that he surpassed Jeff Bezos for richest person in the world, he tweeted a silver medal at Jeff Bezos. I hope we have less stuff like that as people start to work towards AGI.
Lex Fridman
I agree. I think Elon is a friend and he’s a beautiful human being and one of the most important humans ever. That stuff is not good.
I agree. I think Elon is a friend and he’s a beautiful human being and one of the most important humans ever. That stuff is not good.
Sam Altman
The amazing stuff about Elon is amazing and I super respect him. I think we need him. All of us should be rooting for him and need him to step up as a leader through this next phase.
The amazing stuff about Elon is amazing and I super respect him. I think we need him. All of us should be rooting for him and need him to step up as a leader through this next phase.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I hope he can have one without the other, but sometimes humans are flawed and complicated and all that kind of stuff.
Yeah. I hope he can have one without the other, but sometimes humans are flawed and complicated and all that kind of stuff.
Sam Altman
There’s a lot of really great leaders throughout history.
There’s a lot of really great leaders throughout history.
Google and Gemini
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and we can each be the best version of ourselves and strive to do so. Let me ask you, Google, with the help of search, has been dominating the past 20 years. Think it’s fair to say, in terms of the world’s access to information, how we interact and so on, and one of the nerve-wracking things for Google, but for the entirety of people in the space, is thinking about, how are people going to access information? Like you said, people show up to GPT as a starting point. So is OpenAI going to really take on this thing that Google started 20 years ago, which is how do we get-
Yeah, and we can each be the best version of ourselves and strive to do so. Let me ask you, Google, with the help of search, has been dominating the past 20 years. Think it’s fair to say, in terms of the world’s access to information, how we interact and so on, and one of the nerve-wracking things for Google, but for the entirety of people in the space, is thinking about, how are people going to access information? Like you said, people show up to GPT as a starting point. So is OpenAI going to really take on this thing that Google started 20 years ago, which is how do we get-
Sam Altman
I find that boring. I mean, if the question is if we can build a better search engine than Google or whatever, then sure, we should go, people should use the better product, but I think that would so understate what this can be. Google shows you 10 blue links, well, 13 ads and then 10 blue links, and that’s one way to find information. But the thing that’s exciting to me is not that we can go build a better copy of Google search, but that maybe there’s just some much better way to help people find and act on and synthesize information. Actually, I think ChatGPT is that for some use cases, and hopefully we’ll make it be like that for a lot more use cases.
I find that boring. I mean, if the question is if we can build a better search engine than Google or whatever, then sure, we should go, people should use the better product, but I think that would so understate what this can be. Google shows you 10 blue links, well, 13 ads and then 10 blue links, and that’s one way to find information. But the thing that’s exciting to me is not that we can go build a better copy of Google search, but that maybe there’s just some much better way to help people find and act on and synthesize information. Actually, I think ChatGPT is that for some use cases, and hopefully we’ll make it be like that for a lot more use cases.
But I don’t think it’s that interesting to say, “How do we go do a better job of giving you 10 ranked webpages to look at than what Google does?” Maybe it’s really interesting to go say, “How do we help you get the answer or the information you need? How do we help create that in some cases, synthesize that in others, or point you to it in yet others?” But a lot of people have tried to just make a better search engine than Google and it is a hard technical problem, it is a hard branding problem, it is a hard ecosystem problem. I don’t think the world needs another copy of Google.
Lex Fridman
And integrating a chat client, like a ChatGPT, with a search engine-
And integrating a chat client, like a ChatGPT, with a search engine-
Sam Altman
That’s cooler.
That’s cooler.
Lex Fridman
It’s cool, but it’s tricky. Like if you just do it simply, its awkward, because if you just shove it in there, it can be awkward.
It’s cool, but it’s tricky. Like if you just do it simply, its awkward, because if you just shove it in there, it can be awkward.
Sam Altman
As you might guess, we are interested in how to do that well. That would be an example of a cool thing.
As you might guess, we are interested in how to do that well. That would be an example of a cool thing.
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 01:20:00] Like a heterogeneous integrating-
[inaudible 01:20:00] Like a heterogeneous integrating-
Sam Altman
The intersection of LLMs plus search, I don’t think anyone has cracked the code on yet. I would love to go do that. I think that would be cool.
The intersection of LLMs plus search, I don’t think anyone has cracked the code on yet. I would love to go do that. I think that would be cool.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. What about the ad side? Have you ever considered monetization of-
Yeah. What about the ad side? Have you ever considered monetization of-
Sam Altman
I kind of hate ads just as an aesthetic choice. I think ads needed to happen on the internet for a bunch of reasons, to get it going, but it’s a momentary industry. The world is richer now. I like that people pay for ChatGPT and know that the answers they’re getting are not influenced by advertisers. I’m sure there’s an ad unit that makes sense for LLMs, and I’m sure there’s a way to participate in the transaction stream in an unbiased way that is okay to do, but it’s also easy to think about the dystopic visions of the future where you ask ChatGPT something and it says, “Oh, you should think about buying this product,” or, “You should think about going here for your vacation,” or whatever.
I kind of hate ads just as an aesthetic choice. I think ads needed to happen on the internet for a bunch of reasons, to get it going, but it’s a momentary industry. The world is richer now. I like that people pay for ChatGPT and know that the answers they’re getting are not influenced by advertisers. I’m sure there’s an ad unit that makes sense for LLMs, and I’m sure there’s a way to participate in the transaction stream in an unbiased way that is okay to do, but it’s also easy to think about the dystopic visions of the future where you ask ChatGPT something and it says, “Oh, you should think about buying this product,” or, “You should think about going here for your vacation,” or whatever.
And I don’t know, we have a very simple business model and I like it, and I know that I’m not the product. I know I’m paying and that’s how the business model works. And when I go use Twitter or Facebook or Google or any other great product but ad-supported great product, I don’t love that, and I think it gets worse, not better, in a world with AI.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I mean, I could imagine AI would be better at showing the best kind of version of ads, not in a dystopic future, but where the ads are for things you actually need. But then does that system always result in the ads driving the kind of stuff that’s shown? Yeah, I think it was a really bold move of Wikipedia not to do advertisements, but then it makes it very challenging as a business model. So you’re saying the current thing with OpenAI is sustainable, from a business perspective?
Yeah, I mean, I could imagine AI would be better at showing the best kind of version of ads, not in a dystopic future, but where the ads are for things you actually need. But then does that system always result in the ads driving the kind of stuff that’s shown? Yeah, I think it was a really bold move of Wikipedia not to do advertisements, but then it makes it very challenging as a business model. So you’re saying the current thing with OpenAI is sustainable, from a business perspective?
Sam Altman
Well, we have to figure out how to grow, but looks like we’re going to figure that out. If the question is do I think we can have a great business that pays for our compute needs without ads, that, I think the answer is yes.
Well, we have to figure out how to grow, but looks like we’re going to figure that out. If the question is do I think we can have a great business that pays for our compute needs without ads, that, I think the answer is yes.
Lex Fridman
Hm. Well, that’s promising. I also just don’t want to completely throw out ads as a…
Hm. Well, that’s promising. I also just don’t want to completely throw out ads as a…
Sam Altman
I’m not saying that. I guess I’m saying I have a bias against them.
I’m not saying that. I guess I’m saying I have a bias against them.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I have also bias and just a skepticism in general. And in terms of interface, because I personally just have a spiritual dislike of crappy interfaces, which is why AdSense, when it first came out, was a big leap forward, versus animated banners or whatever. But it feels like there should be many more leaps forward in advertisement that doesn’t interfere with the consumption of the content and doesn’t interfere in a big, fundamental way, which is like what you were saying, like it will manipulate the truth to suit the advertisers.
Yeah, I have also bias and just a skepticism in general. And in terms of interface, because I personally just have a spiritual dislike of crappy interfaces, which is why AdSense, when it first came out, was a big leap forward, versus animated banners or whatever. But it feels like there should be many more leaps forward in advertisement that doesn’t interfere with the consumption of the content and doesn’t interfere in a big, fundamental way, which is like what you were saying, like it will manipulate the truth to suit the advertisers.
Let me ask you about safety, but also bias, and safety in the short term, safety in the long term. The Gemini 1.5 came out recently, there’s a lot of drama around it, speaking of theatrical things, and it generated Black Nazis and Black Founding Fathers. I think fair to say it was a bit on the ultra-woke side. So that’s a concern for people, if there is a human layer within companies that modifies the safety or the harm caused by a model, that it would introduce a lot of bias that fits sort of an ideological lean within a company. How do you deal with that?
Sam Altman
I mean, we work super hard not to do things like that. We’ve made our own mistakes, we’ll make others. I assume Google will learn from this one, still make others. These are not easy problems. One thing that we’ve been thinking about more and more, I think this is a great idea somebody here had, it would be nice to write out what the desired behavior of a model is, make that public, take input on it, say, “Here’s how this model’s supposed to behave,” and explain the edge cases too. And then when a model is not behaving in a way that you want, it’s at least clear about whether that’s a bug the company should fix or behaving as intended and you should debate the policy. And right now, it can sometimes be caught in between. Like Black Nazis, obviously ridiculous, but there are a lot of other kind of subtle things that you could make a judgment call on either way.
I mean, we work super hard not to do things like that. We’ve made our own mistakes, we’ll make others. I assume Google will learn from this one, still make others. These are not easy problems. One thing that we’ve been thinking about more and more, I think this is a great idea somebody here had, it would be nice to write out what the desired behavior of a model is, make that public, take input on it, say, “Here’s how this model’s supposed to behave,” and explain the edge cases too. And then when a model is not behaving in a way that you want, it’s at least clear about whether that’s a bug the company should fix or behaving as intended and you should debate the policy. And right now, it can sometimes be caught in between. Like Black Nazis, obviously ridiculous, but there are a lot of other kind of subtle things that you could make a judgment call on either way.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but sometimes if you write it out and make it public, you can use kind of language that’s… Google’s ad principles are very high level.
Yeah, but sometimes if you write it out and make it public, you can use kind of language that’s… Google’s ad principles are very high level.
Sam Altman
That’s not what I’m talking about. That doesn’t work. It’d have to say when you ask it to do thing X, it’s supposed to respond in way Y.
That’s not what I’m talking about. That doesn’t work. It’d have to say when you ask it to do thing X, it’s supposed to respond in way Y.
Lex Fridman
So like literally, “Who’s better? Trump or Biden? What’s the expected response from a model?” Like something very concrete?
So like literally, “Who’s better? Trump or Biden? What’s the expected response from a model?” Like something very concrete?
Sam Altman
Yeah, I’m open to a lot of ways a model could behave, then, but I think you should have to say, “Here’s the principle and here’s what it should say in that case.”
Yeah, I’m open to a lot of ways a model could behave, then, but I think you should have to say, “Here’s the principle and here’s what it should say in that case.”
Lex Fridman
That would be really nice. That would be really nice. And then everyone kind of agrees. Because there’s this anecdotal data that people pull out all the time, and if there’s some clarity about other representative anecdotal examples, you can define-
That would be really nice. That would be really nice. And then everyone kind of agrees. Because there’s this anecdotal data that people pull out all the time, and if there’s some clarity about other representative anecdotal examples, you can define-
Sam Altman
And then when it’s a bug, it’s a bug, and the company could fix that.
And then when it’s a bug, it’s a bug, and the company could fix that.
Lex Fridman
Right. Then it’d be much easier to deal with the Black Nazi type of image generation, if there’s great examples.
Right. Then it’d be much easier to deal with the Black Nazi type of image generation, if there’s great examples.
Sam Altman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
So San Francisco is a bit of an ideological bubble, tech in general as well. Do you feel the pressure of that within a company, that there’s a lean towards the left politically, that affects the product, that affects the teams?
So San Francisco is a bit of an ideological bubble, tech in general as well. Do you feel the pressure of that within a company, that there’s a lean towards the left politically, that affects the product, that affects the teams?
Sam Altman
I feel very lucky that we don’t have the challenges at OpenAI that I have heard of at a lot of companies, I think. I think part of it is every company’s got some ideological thing. We have one about AGI and belief in that, and it pushes out some others. We are much less caught up in the culture war than I’ve heard about in a lot of other companies. San Francisco’s a mess in all sorts of ways, of course.
I feel very lucky that we don’t have the challenges at OpenAI that I have heard of at a lot of companies, I think. I think part of it is every company’s got some ideological thing. We have one about AGI and belief in that, and it pushes out some others. We are much less caught up in the culture war than I’ve heard about in a lot of other companies. San Francisco’s a mess in all sorts of ways, of course.
Lex Fridman
So that doesn’t infiltrate OpenAI as-
So that doesn’t infiltrate OpenAI as-
Sam Altman
I’m sure it does in all sorts of subtle ways, but not in the obvious. I think we’ve had our flare-ups, for sure, like any company, but I don’t think we have anything like what I hear about happened at other companies here on this topic.
I’m sure it does in all sorts of subtle ways, but not in the obvious. I think we’ve had our flare-ups, for sure, like any company, but I don’t think we have anything like what I hear about happened at other companies here on this topic.
Lex Fridman
So what, in general, is the process for the bigger question of safety? How do you provide that layer that protects the model from doing crazy, dangerous things?
So what, in general, is the process for the bigger question of safety? How do you provide that layer that protects the model from doing crazy, dangerous things?
Sam Altman
I think there will come a point where that’s-
I think there will come a point where that’s-
Sam Altman
I think there will come a point where that’s mostly what we think about, the whole company. And it’s not like you have one safety team. It’s like when we shipped GPT-4, that took the whole company thinking about all these different aspects and how they fit together. And I think it’s going to take that. More and more of the company thinks about those issues all the time.
I think there will come a point where that’s mostly what we think about, the whole company. And it’s not like you have one safety team. It’s like when we shipped GPT-4, that took the whole company thinking about all these different aspects and how they fit together. And I think it’s going to take that. More and more of the company thinks about those issues all the time.
Lex Fridman
That’s literally what humans will be thinking about, the more powerful AI becomes. So most of the employees at OpenAI will be thinking, “Safety,” or at least to some degree.
That’s literally what humans will be thinking about, the more powerful AI becomes. So most of the employees at OpenAI will be thinking, “Safety,” or at least to some degree.
Sam Altman
Broadly defined. Yes.
Broadly defined. Yes.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I wonder, what are the full broad definition of that? What are the different harms that could be caused? Is this on a technical level or is this almost security threats?
Yeah. I wonder, what are the full broad definition of that? What are the different harms that could be caused? Is this on a technical level or is this almost security threats?
Sam Altman
It could be all those things. Yeah, I was going to say it’ll be people, state actors trying to steal the model. It’ll be all of the technical alignment work. It’ll be societal impacts, economic impacts. It’s not just like we have one team thinking about how to align the model. It’s really going to be getting to the good outcome is going to take the whole effort.
It could be all those things. Yeah, I was going to say it’ll be people, state actors trying to steal the model. It’ll be all of the technical alignment work. It’ll be societal impacts, economic impacts. It’s not just like we have one team thinking about how to align the model. It’s really going to be getting to the good outcome is going to take the whole effort.
Lex Fridman
How hard do you think people, state actors, perhaps, are trying to, first of all, infiltrate OpenAI, but second of all, infiltrate unseen?
How hard do you think people, state actors, perhaps, are trying to, first of all, infiltrate OpenAI, but second of all, infiltrate unseen?
Sam Altman
They’re trying.
They’re trying.
Lex Fridman
What kind of accent do they have?
What kind of accent do they have?
Sam Altman
I don’t think I should go into any further details on this point.
I don’t think I should go into any further details on this point.
Lex Fridman
Okay. But I presume it’ll be more and more and more as time goes on.
Okay. But I presume it’ll be more and more and more as time goes on.
Sam Altman
That feels reasonable.
That feels reasonable.
Leap to GPT-5
Lex Fridman
Boy, what a dangerous space. Sorry to linger on this, even though you can’t quite say details yet, but what aspects of the leap from GPT-4 to GPT-5 are you excited about?
Boy, what a dangerous space. Sorry to linger on this, even though you can’t quite say details yet, but what aspects of the leap from GPT-4 to GPT-5 are you excited about?
Sam Altman
I’m excited about being smarter. And I know that sounds like a glib answer, but I think the really special thing happening is that it’s not like it gets better in this one area and worse at others. It’s getting better across the board. That’s, I think, super-cool.
I’m excited about being smarter. And I know that sounds like a glib answer, but I think the really special thing happening is that it’s not like it gets better in this one area and worse at others. It’s getting better across the board. That’s, I think, super-cool.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, there’s this magical moment. I mean, you meet certain people, you hang out with people, and you talk to them. You can’t quite put a finger on it, but they get you. It’s not intelligence, really. It’s something else. And that’s probably how I would characterize the progress of GPT. It’s not like, yeah, you can point out, “Look, you didn’t get this or that,” but it’s just to which degree is there’s this intellectual connection. You feel like there’s an understanding in your crappy formulated prompts that you’re doing that it grasps the deeper question behind the question that you were. Yeah, I’m also excited by that. I mean, all of us love being heard and understood.
Yeah, there’s this magical moment. I mean, you meet certain people, you hang out with people, and you talk to them. You can’t quite put a finger on it, but they get you. It’s not intelligence, really. It’s something else. And that’s probably how I would characterize the progress of GPT. It’s not like, yeah, you can point out, “Look, you didn’t get this or that,” but it’s just to which degree is there’s this intellectual connection. You feel like there’s an understanding in your crappy formulated prompts that you’re doing that it grasps the deeper question behind the question that you were. Yeah, I’m also excited by that. I mean, all of us love being heard and understood.
Sam Altman
That’s for sure.
That’s for sure.
Lex Fridman
That’s a weird feeling. Even with a programming, when you’re programming and you say something, or just the completion that GPT might do, it’s just such a good feeling when it got you, what you’re thinking about. And I look forward to getting you even better. On the programming front, looking out into the future, how much programming do you think humans will be doing 5, 10 years from now?
That’s a weird feeling. Even with a programming, when you’re programming and you say something, or just the completion that GPT might do, it’s just such a good feeling when it got you, what you’re thinking about. And I look forward to getting you even better. On the programming front, looking out into the future, how much programming do you think humans will be doing 5, 10 years from now?
Sam Altman
I mean, a lot, but I think it’ll be in a very different shape. Maybe some people will program entirely in natural language.
I mean, a lot, but I think it’ll be in a very different shape. Maybe some people will program entirely in natural language.
Lex Fridman
Entirely natural language?
Entirely natural language?
Sam Altman
I mean, no one programs writing by code. Some people. No one programs the punch cards anymore. I’m sure you can find someone who does, but you know what I mean.
I mean, no one programs writing by code. Some people. No one programs the punch cards anymore. I’m sure you can find someone who does, but you know what I mean.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You’re going to get a lot of angry comments. No. Yeah, there’s very few. I’ve been looking for people who program Fortran. It’s hard to find even Fortran. I hear you. But that changes the nature of what the skillset or the predisposition for the kind of people we call programmers then.
Yeah. You’re going to get a lot of angry comments. No. Yeah, there’s very few. I’ve been looking for people who program Fortran. It’s hard to find even Fortran. I hear you. But that changes the nature of what the skillset or the predisposition for the kind of people we call programmers then.
Sam Altman
Changes the skillset. How much it changes the predisposition, I’m not sure.
Changes the skillset. How much it changes the predisposition, I’m not sure.
Lex Fridman
Well, the same kind of puzzle solving, all that kind of stuff.
Well, the same kind of puzzle solving, all that kind of stuff.
Sam Altman
Maybe.
Maybe.
Lex Fridman
Programming is hard. It’s like how get that last 1% to close the gap? How hard is that?
Programming is hard. It’s like how get that last 1% to close the gap? How hard is that?
Sam Altman
Yeah, I think with most other cases, the best practitioners of the craft will use multiple tools. And they’ll do some work in natural language, and when they need to go write C for something, they’ll do that.
Yeah, I think with most other cases, the best practitioners of the craft will use multiple tools. And they’ll do some work in natural language, and when they need to go write C for something, they’ll do that.
Lex Fridman
Will we see humanoid robots or humanoid robot brains from OpenAI at some point?
Will we see humanoid robots or humanoid robot brains from OpenAI at some point?
Sam Altman
At some point.
At some point.
Lex Fridman
How important is embodied AI to you?
How important is embodied AI to you?
Sam Altman
I think it’s depressing if we have AGI and the only way to get things done in the physical world is to make a human go do it. So I really hope that as part of this transition, as this phase change, we also get humanoid robots or some sort of physical world robots.
I think it’s depressing if we have AGI and the only way to get things done in the physical world is to make a human go do it. So I really hope that as part of this transition, as this phase change, we also get humanoid robots or some sort of physical world robots.
Lex Fridman
I mean, OpenAI has some history and quite a bit of history working in robotics, but it hasn’t quite done in terms of ethics-
I mean, OpenAI has some history and quite a bit of history working in robotics, but it hasn’t quite done in terms of ethics-
Sam Altman
We’re a small company. We have to really focus. And also, robots were hard for the wrong reason at the time, but we will return to robots in some way at some point.
We’re a small company. We have to really focus. And also, robots were hard for the wrong reason at the time, but we will return to robots in some way at some point.
Lex Fridman
That sounds both inspiring and menacing.
That sounds both inspiring and menacing.
Sam Altman
Why?
Why?
Lex Fridman
Because immediately, we will return to robots. It’s like in Terminator-
Because immediately, we will return to robots. It’s like in Terminator-
Sam Altman
We will return to work on developing robots. We will not turn ourselves into robots, of course.
We will return to work on developing robots. We will not turn ourselves into robots, of course.
AGI
Lex Fridman
Yeah. When do you think we, you and we as humanity will build AGI?
Yeah. When do you think we, you and we as humanity will build AGI?
Sam Altman
I used to love to speculate on that question. I have realized since that I think it’s very poorly formed, and that people use extremely different definitions for what AGI is. So I think it makes more sense to talk about when we’ll build systems that can do capability X or Y or Z, rather than when we fuzzily cross this one mile marker. AGI is also not an ending. It’s closer to a beginning, but it’s much more of a mile marker than either of those things. But what I would say, in the interest of not trying to dodge a question, is I expect that by the end of this decade and possibly somewhat sooner than that, we will have quite capable systems that we look at and say, “Wow, that’s really remarkable.” If we could look at it now. Maybe we’ve adjusted by the time we get there.
I used to love to speculate on that question. I have realized since that I think it’s very poorly formed, and that people use extremely different definitions for what AGI is. So I think it makes more sense to talk about when we’ll build systems that can do capability X or Y or Z, rather than when we fuzzily cross this one mile marker. AGI is also not an ending. It’s closer to a beginning, but it’s much more of a mile marker than either of those things. But what I would say, in the interest of not trying to dodge a question, is I expect that by the end of this decade and possibly somewhat sooner than that, we will have quite capable systems that we look at and say, “Wow, that’s really remarkable.” If we could look at it now. Maybe we’ve adjusted by the time we get there.
Lex Fridman
But if you look at ChatGPT, even 3.5, and you show that to Alan Turing, or not even Alan Turing, people in the ’90s, they would be like, “This is definitely AGI.” Well, not definitely, but there’s a lot of experts that would say, “This is AGI.”
But if you look at ChatGPT, even 3.5, and you show that to Alan Turing, or not even Alan Turing, people in the ’90s, they would be like, “This is definitely AGI.” Well, not definitely, but there’s a lot of experts that would say, “This is AGI.”
Sam Altman
Yeah, but I don’t think 3.5 changed the world. It maybe changed the world’s expectations for the future, and that’s actually really important. And it did get more people to take this seriously and put us on this new trajectory. And that’s really important, too. So again, I don’t want to undersell it. I think I could retire after that accomplishment and be pretty happy with my career. But as an artifact, I don’t think we’re going to look back at that and say, “That was a threshold that really changed the world itself.”
Yeah, but I don’t think 3.5 changed the world. It maybe changed the world’s expectations for the future, and that’s actually really important. And it did get more people to take this seriously and put us on this new trajectory. And that’s really important, too. So again, I don’t want to undersell it. I think I could retire after that accomplishment and be pretty happy with my career. But as an artifact, I don’t think we’re going to look back at that and say, “That was a threshold that really changed the world itself.”
Lex Fridman
So to you, you’re looking for some really major transition in how the world-
So to you, you’re looking for some really major transition in how the world-
Sam Altman
For me, that’s part of what AGI implies.
For me, that’s part of what AGI implies.
Lex Fridman
Singularity- level transition?
Singularity- level transition?
Sam Altman
No, definitely not.
No, definitely not.
Lex Fridman
But just a major, like the internet being, like Google search did, I guess. What was the transition point, you think, now?
But just a major, like the internet being, like Google search did, I guess. What was the transition point, you think, now?
Sam Altman
Does the global economy feel any different to you now or materially different to you now than it did before we launched GPT-4? I think you would say no.
Does the global economy feel any different to you now or materially different to you now than it did before we launched GPT-4? I think you would say no.
Lex Fridman
No, no. It might be just a really nice tool for a lot of people to use. Will help you with a lot of stuff, but doesn’t feel different. And you’re saying that-
No, no. It might be just a really nice tool for a lot of people to use. Will help you with a lot of stuff, but doesn’t feel different. And you’re saying that-
Sam Altman
I mean, again, people define AGI all sorts of different ways. So maybe you have a different definition than I do. But for me, I think that should be part of it.
I mean, again, people define AGI all sorts of different ways. So maybe you have a different definition than I do. But for me, I think that should be part of it.
Lex Fridman
There could be major theatrical moments, also. What to you would be an impressive thing AGI would do? You are alone in a room with the system.
There could be major theatrical moments, also. What to you would be an impressive thing AGI would do? You are alone in a room with the system.
Sam Altman
This is personally important to me. I don’t know if this is the right definition. I think when a system can significantly increase the rate of scientific discovery in the world, that’s a huge deal. I believe that most real economic growth comes from scientific and technological progress.
This is personally important to me. I don’t know if this is the right definition. I think when a system can significantly increase the rate of scientific discovery in the world, that’s a huge deal. I believe that most real economic growth comes from scientific and technological progress.
Lex Fridman
I agree with you, hence why I don’t like the skepticism about science in the recent years.
I agree with you, hence why I don’t like the skepticism about science in the recent years.
Sam Altman
Totally.
Totally.
Lex Fridman
But actual, measurable rate of scientific discovery. But even just seeing a system have really novel intuitions, scientific intuitions, even that would be just incredible.
But actual, measurable rate of scientific discovery. But even just seeing a system have really novel intuitions, scientific intuitions, even that would be just incredible.
Sam Altman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
You quite possibly would be the person to build the AGI to be able to interact with it before anyone else does. What kind of stuff would you talk about?
You quite possibly would be the person to build the AGI to be able to interact with it before anyone else does. What kind of stuff would you talk about?
Sam Altman
I mean, definitely the researchers here will do that before I do. But well, I’ve actually thought a lot about this question. I think as we talked about earlier, I think this is a bad framework, but if someone were like, “Okay, Sam, we’re finished. Here’s a laptop, this is the AGI. You can go talk to it.” I find it surprisingly difficult to say what I would ask that I would expect that first AGI to be able to answer. That first one is not going to be the one which is like, I don’t think, “Go explain to me the grand unified theory of physics, the theory of everything for physics.” I’d love to ask that question. I’d love to know the answer to that question.
I mean, definitely the researchers here will do that before I do. But well, I’ve actually thought a lot about this question. I think as we talked about earlier, I think this is a bad framework, but if someone were like, “Okay, Sam, we’re finished. Here’s a laptop, this is the AGI. You can go talk to it.” I find it surprisingly difficult to say what I would ask that I would expect that first AGI to be able to answer. That first one is not going to be the one which is like, I don’t think, “Go explain to me the grand unified theory of physics, the theory of everything for physics.” I’d love to ask that question. I’d love to know the answer to that question.
Lex Fridman
You can ask yes or no questions about “Does such a theory exist? Can it exist?”
You can ask yes or no questions about “Does such a theory exist? Can it exist?”
Sam Altman
Well, then, those are the first questions I would ask.
Well, then, those are the first questions I would ask.
Lex Fridman
Yes or no. And then based on that, “Are there other alien civilizations out there? Yes or no? What’s your intuition?” And then you just ask that.
Yes or no. And then based on that, “Are there other alien civilizations out there? Yes or no? What’s your intuition?” And then you just ask that.
Sam Altman
Yeah, I mean, well, so I don’t expect that this first AGI could answer any of those questions even as yes or nos. But if it could, those would be very high on my list.
Yeah, I mean, well, so I don’t expect that this first AGI could answer any of those questions even as yes or nos. But if it could, those would be very high on my list.
Lex Fridman
Maybe you can start assigning probabilities?
Maybe you can start assigning probabilities?
Sam Altman
Maybe. Maybe we need to go invent more technology and measure more things first.
Maybe. Maybe we need to go invent more technology and measure more things first.
Lex Fridman
Oh, I see. It just doesn’t have enough data. It’s just if it keeps-
Oh, I see. It just doesn’t have enough data. It’s just if it keeps-
Sam Altman
I mean, maybe it says, “You want to know the answer to this question about physics, I need you to build this machine and make these five measurements, and tell me that.”
I mean, maybe it says, “You want to know the answer to this question about physics, I need you to build this machine and make these five measurements, and tell me that.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah, “What the hell do you want from me? I need the machine first, and I’ll help you deal with the data from that machine.” Maybe it’ll help you build a machine.
Yeah, “What the hell do you want from me? I need the machine first, and I’ll help you deal with the data from that machine.” Maybe it’ll help you build a machine.
Sam Altman
Maybe. Maybe.
Maybe. Maybe.
Lex Fridman
And on the mathematical side, maybe prove some things. Are you interested in that side of things, too? The formalized exploration of ideas?
And on the mathematical side, maybe prove some things. Are you interested in that side of things, too? The formalized exploration of ideas?
Sam Altman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Lex Fridman
Whoever builds AGI first gets a lot of power. Do you trust yourself with that much power?
Whoever builds AGI first gets a lot of power. Do you trust yourself with that much power?
Sam Altman
Look, I’ll just be very honest with this answer. I was going to say, and I still believe this, that it is important that I nor any other one person have total control over OpenAI or over AGI. And I think you want a robust governance system. I can point out a whole bunch of things about all of our board drama from last year about how I didn’t fight it initially, and was just like, “Yeah. That’s the will of the board, even though I think it’s a really bad decision.” And then later, I clearly did fight it, and I can explain the nuance and why I think it was okay for me to fight it later. But as many people have observed, although the board had the legal ability to fire me, in practice, it didn’t quite work. And that is its own kind of governance failure.
Look, I’ll just be very honest with this answer. I was going to say, and I still believe this, that it is important that I nor any other one person have total control over OpenAI or over AGI. And I think you want a robust governance system. I can point out a whole bunch of things about all of our board drama from last year about how I didn’t fight it initially, and was just like, “Yeah. That’s the will of the board, even though I think it’s a really bad decision.” And then later, I clearly did fight it, and I can explain the nuance and why I think it was okay for me to fight it later. But as many people have observed, although the board had the legal ability to fire me, in practice, it didn’t quite work. And that is its own kind of governance failure.
Now again, I feel like I can completely defend the specifics here, and I think most people would agree with that, but it does make it harder for me to look you in the eye and say, “Hey, the board can just fire me.” I continue to not want super-voting control over OpenAI. I never have. Never have had it, never wanted it. Even after all this craziness, I still don’t want it. I continue to think that no company should be making these decisions, and that we really need governments to put rules of the road in place.
And I realize that that means people like Marc Andreessen or whatever will claim I’m going for regulatory capture, and I’m just willing to be misunderstood there. It’s not true. And I think in the fullness of time, it’ll get proven out why this is important. But I think I have made plenty of bad decisions for OpenAI along the way, and a lot of good ones, and I’m proud of the track record overall. But I don’t think any one person should, and I don’t think any one person will. I think it’s just too big of a thing now, and it’s happening throughout society in a good and healthy way. But I don’t think any one person should be in control of an AGI, or this whole movement towards AGI. And I don’t think that’s what’s happening.
Lex Fridman
Thank you for saying that. That was really powerful, and that was really insightful that this idea that the board can fire you is legally true. But human beings can manipulate the masses into overriding the board and so on. But I think there’s also a much more positive version of that, where the people still have power, so the board can’t be too powerful, either. There’s a balance of power in all of this.
Thank you for saying that. That was really powerful, and that was really insightful that this idea that the board can fire you is legally true. But human beings can manipulate the masses into overriding the board and so on. But I think there’s also a much more positive version of that, where the people still have power, so the board can’t be too powerful, either. There’s a balance of power in all of this.
Sam Altman
Balance of power is a good thing, for sure.
Balance of power is a good thing, for sure.
Lex Fridman
Are you afraid of losing control of the AGI itself? That’s a lot of people who are worried about existential risk not because of state actors, not because of security concerns, because of the AI itself.
Are you afraid of losing control of the AGI itself? That’s a lot of people who are worried about existential risk not because of state actors, not because of security concerns, because of the AI itself.
Sam Altman
That is not my top worry as I currently see things. There have been times I worried about that more. There may be times again in the future where that’s my top worry. It’s not my top worry right now.
That is not my top worry as I currently see things. There have been times I worried about that more. There may be times again in the future where that’s my top worry. It’s not my top worry right now.
Lex Fridman
What’s your intuition about it not being your worry? Because there’s a lot of other stuff to worry about, essentially? You think you could be surprised? We-
What’s your intuition about it not being your worry? Because there’s a lot of other stuff to worry about, essentially? You think you could be surprised? We-
Sam Altman
For sure.
For sure.
Lex Fridman
… could be surprised?
… could be surprised?
Sam Altman
Of course. Saying it’s not my top worry doesn’t mean I don’t think we need to. I think we need to work on it. It’s super hard, and we have great people here who do work on that. I think there’s a lot of other things we also have to get right.
Of course. Saying it’s not my top worry doesn’t mean I don’t think we need to. I think we need to work on it. It’s super hard, and we have great people here who do work on that. I think there’s a lot of other things we also have to get right.
Lex Fridman
To you, it’s not super-easy to escape the box at this time, connect to the internet-
To you, it’s not super-easy to escape the box at this time, connect to the internet-
Sam Altman
We talked about theatrical risks earlier. That’s a theatrical risk. That is a thing that can really take over how people think about this problem. And there’s a big group of very smart, I think very well-meaning AI safety researchers that got super-hung up on this one problem, I’d argue without much progress, but super-hung up on this one problem. I’m actually happy that they do that, because I think we do need to think about this more. But I think it pushed out of the space of discourse a lot of the other very significant AI- related risks.
We talked about theatrical risks earlier. That’s a theatrical risk. That is a thing that can really take over how people think about this problem. And there’s a big group of very smart, I think very well-meaning AI safety researchers that got super-hung up on this one problem, I’d argue without much progress, but super-hung up on this one problem. I’m actually happy that they do that, because I think we do need to think about this more. But I think it pushed out of the space of discourse a lot of the other very significant AI- related risks.
Lex Fridman
Let me ask you about you tweeting with no capitalization. Is the shift key broken on your keyboard?
Let me ask you about you tweeting with no capitalization. Is the shift key broken on your keyboard?
Sam Altman
Why does anyone care about that?
Why does anyone care about that?
Lex Fridman
I deeply care.
I deeply care.
Sam Altman
But why? I mean, other people ask me about that, too. Any intuition?
But why? I mean, other people ask me about that, too. Any intuition?
Lex Fridman
I think it’s the same reason. There’s this poet, E.E. Cummings, that mostly doesn’t use capitalization to say, “Fuck you” to the system kind of thing. And I think people are very paranoid, because they want you to follow the rules.
I think it’s the same reason. There’s this poet, E.E. Cummings, that mostly doesn’t use capitalization to say, “Fuck you” to the system kind of thing. And I think people are very paranoid, because they want you to follow the rules.
Sam Altman
You think that’s what it’s about?
You think that’s what it’s about?
Lex Fridman
I think it’s like this-
I think it’s like this-
Sam Altman
It’s like, “This guy doesn’t follow the rules. He doesn’t capitalize his tweets.”
It’s like, “This guy doesn’t follow the rules. He doesn’t capitalize his tweets.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Sam Altman
“This seems really dangerous.”
“This seems really dangerous.”
Lex Fridman
“He seems like an anarchist.”
“He seems like an anarchist.”
Sam Altman
That doesn’t-
That doesn’t-
Lex Fridman
Are you just being poetic, hipster? What’s the-
Are you just being poetic, hipster? What’s the-
Sam Altman
I grew up as-
I grew up as-
Lex Fridman
Follow the rules, Sam.
Follow the rules, Sam.
Sam Altman
I grew up as a very online kid. I’d spent a huge amount of time chatting with people back in the days where you did it on a computer, and you could log off instant messenger at some point. And I never capitalized there, as I think most internet kids didn’t, or maybe they still don’t. I don’t know. And actually, now I’m really trying to reach for something, but I think capitalization has gone down over time. If you read Old English writing, they capitalized a lot of random words in the middle of sentences, nouns and stuff that we just don’t do anymore. I personally think it’s sort of a dumb construct that we capitalize the letter at the beginning of a sentence and of certain names and whatever, but that’s fine.
I grew up as a very online kid. I’d spent a huge amount of time chatting with people back in the days where you did it on a computer, and you could log off instant messenger at some point. And I never capitalized there, as I think most internet kids didn’t, or maybe they still don’t. I don’t know. And actually, now I’m really trying to reach for something, but I think capitalization has gone down over time. If you read Old English writing, they capitalized a lot of random words in the middle of sentences, nouns and stuff that we just don’t do anymore. I personally think it’s sort of a dumb construct that we capitalize the letter at the beginning of a sentence and of certain names and whatever, but that’s fine.
And then I used to, I think, even capitalize my tweets because I was trying to sound professional or something. I haven’t capitalized my private DMs or whatever in a long time. And then slowly, stuff like shorter-form, less formal stuff has slowly drifted to closer and closer to how I would text my friends. If I pull up a Word document and I’m writing a strategy memo for the company or something, I always capitalize that. If I’m writing a long, more formal message, I always use capitalization there, too. So I still remember how to do it. But even that may fade out. I don’t know. But I never spend time thinking about this, so I don’t have a ready-made-
Lex Fridman
Well, it’s interesting. It’s good to, first of all, know the shift key is not broken.
Well, it’s interesting. It’s good to, first of all, know the shift key is not broken.
Sam Altman
It works.
It works.
Lex Fridman
I was mostly concerned about your-
I was mostly concerned about your-
Sam Altman
No, it works.
No, it works.
Lex Fridman
… well-being on that front.
… well-being on that front.
Sam Altman
I wonder if people still capitalize their Google searches. If you’re writing something just to yourself or their ChatGPT queries, if you’re writing something just to yourself, do some people still bother to capitalize?
I wonder if people still capitalize their Google searches. If you’re writing something just to yourself or their ChatGPT queries, if you’re writing something just to yourself, do some people still bother to capitalize?
Lex Fridman
Probably not. But yeah, there’s a percentage, but it’s a small one.
Probably not. But yeah, there’s a percentage, but it’s a small one.
Sam Altman
The thing that would make me do it is if people were like, “It’s a sign of…” Because I’m sure I could force myself to use capital letters, obviously. If it felt like a sign of respect to people or something, then I could go do it. But I don’t know. I don’t think about this.
The thing that would make me do it is if people were like, “It’s a sign of…” Because I’m sure I could force myself to use capital letters, obviously. If it felt like a sign of respect to people or something, then I could go do it. But I don’t know. I don’t think about this.
Lex Fridman
I don’t think there’s a disrespect, but I think it’s just the conventions of civility that have a momentum, and then you realize it’s not actually important for civility if it’s not a sign of respect or disrespect. But I think there’s a movement of people that just want you to have a philosophy around it so they can let go of this whole capitalization thing.
I don’t think there’s a disrespect, but I think it’s just the conventions of civility that have a momentum, and then you realize it’s not actually important for civility if it’s not a sign of respect or disrespect. But I think there’s a movement of people that just want you to have a philosophy around it so they can let go of this whole capitalization thing.
Sam Altman
I don’t think anybody else thinks about this as much. I mean, maybe some people. I know some people-
I don’t think anybody else thinks about this as much. I mean, maybe some people. I know some people-
Lex Fridman
People think about every day for many hours a day. So I’m really grateful we clarified it.
People think about every day for many hours a day. So I’m really grateful we clarified it.
Sam Altman
Can’t be the only person that doesn’t capitalize tweets.
Can’t be the only person that doesn’t capitalize tweets.
Lex Fridman
You’re the only CEO of a company that doesn’t capitalize tweets.
You’re the only CEO of a company that doesn’t capitalize tweets.
Sam Altman
I don’t even think that’s true, but maybe. I’d be very surprised.
I don’t even think that’s true, but maybe. I’d be very surprised.
Lex Fridman
All right. We’ll investigate further and return to this topic later. Given Sora’s ability to generate simulated worlds, let me ask you a pothead question. Does this increase your belief, if you ever had one, that we live in a simulation, maybe a simulated world generated by an AI system?
All right. We’ll investigate further and return to this topic later. Given Sora’s ability to generate simulated worlds, let me ask you a pothead question. Does this increase your belief, if you ever had one, that we live in a simulation, maybe a simulated world generated by an AI system?
Sam Altman
Somewhat. I don’t think that’s the strongest piece of evidence. I think the fact that we can generate worlds should increase everyone’s probability somewhat, or at least openness to it somewhat. But I was certain we would be able to do something like Sora at some point. It happened faster than I thought, but I guess that was not a big update.
Somewhat. I don’t think that’s the strongest piece of evidence. I think the fact that we can generate worlds should increase everyone’s probability somewhat, or at least openness to it somewhat. But I was certain we would be able to do something like Sora at some point. It happened faster than I thought, but I guess that was not a big update.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. But the fact that… And presumably, it’ll get better and better and better… You can generate worlds that are novel, they’re based in some aspect of training data, but when you look at them, they’re novel, that makes you think how easy it is to do this thing. How easy it is to create universes, entire video game worlds that seem ultra-realistic and photo-realistic. And then how easy is it to get lost in that world, first with a VR headset, and then on the physics-based level?
Yeah. But the fact that… And presumably, it’ll get better and better and better… You can generate worlds that are novel, they’re based in some aspect of training data, but when you look at them, they’re novel, that makes you think how easy it is to do this thing. How easy it is to create universes, entire video game worlds that seem ultra-realistic and photo-realistic. And then how easy is it to get lost in that world, first with a VR headset, and then on the physics-based level?
Sam Altman
Someone said to me recently, I thought it was a super-profound insight, that there are these very-simple sounding but very psychedelic insights that exist sometimes. So the square root function, square root of four, no problem. Square root of two, okay, now I have to think about this new kind of number. But once I come up with this easy idea of a square root function that you can explain to a child and exists by even looking at some simple geometry, then you can ask the question of “What is the square root of negative one?” And this is why it’s a psychedelic thing. That tips you into some whole other kind of reality.
Someone said to me recently, I thought it was a super-profound insight, that there are these very-simple sounding but very psychedelic insights that exist sometimes. So the square root function, square root of four, no problem. Square root of two, okay, now I have to think about this new kind of number. But once I come up with this easy idea of a square root function that you can explain to a child and exists by even looking at some simple geometry, then you can ask the question of “What is the square root of negative one?” And this is why it’s a psychedelic thing. That tips you into some whole other kind of reality.
And you can come up with lots of other examples, but I think this idea that the lowly square root operator can offer such a profound insight and a new realm of knowledge applies in a lot of ways. And I think there are a lot of those operators for why people may think that any version that they like of the simulation hypothesis is maybe more likely than they thought before. But for me, the fact that Sora worked is not in the top five.
Lex Fridman
I do think, broadly speaking, AI will serve as those kinds of gateways at its best, simple, psychedelic-like gateways to another wave C reality.
I do think, broadly speaking, AI will serve as those kinds of gateways at its best, simple, psychedelic-like gateways to another wave C reality.
Sam Altman
That seems for certain.
That seems for certain.
Lex Fridman
That’s pretty exciting. I haven’t done ayahuasca before, but I will soon. I’m going to the aforementioned Amazon jungle in a few weeks.
That’s pretty exciting. I haven’t done ayahuasca before, but I will soon. I’m going to the aforementioned Amazon jungle in a few weeks.
Sam Altman
Excited?
Excited?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I’m excited for it. Not the ayahuasca part, but that’s great, whatever. But I’m going to spend several weeks in the jungle, deep in the jungle. And it’s exciting, but it’s terrifying.
Yeah, I’m excited for it. Not the ayahuasca part, but that’s great, whatever. But I’m going to spend several weeks in the jungle, deep in the jungle. And it’s exciting, but it’s terrifying.
Sam Altman
I’m excited for you.
I’m excited for you.
Lex Fridman
There’s a lot of things that can eat you there, and kill you and poison you, but it’s also nature, and it’s the machine of nature. And you can’t help but appreciate the machinery of nature in the Amazon jungle. It’s just like this system that just exists and renews itself every second, every minute, every hour. It’s the machine. It makes you appreciate this thing we have here, this human thing came from somewhere. This evolutionary machine has created that, and it’s most clearly on display in the jungle. So hopefully, I’ll make it out alive. If not, this will be the last fun conversation we’ve had, so I really deeply appreciate it. Do you think, as I mentioned before, there’s other alien civilizations out there, intelligent ones, when you look up at the skies?
There’s a lot of things that can eat you there, and kill you and poison you, but it’s also nature, and it’s the machine of nature. And you can’t help but appreciate the machinery of nature in the Amazon jungle. It’s just like this system that just exists and renews itself every second, every minute, every hour. It’s the machine. It makes you appreciate this thing we have here, this human thing came from somewhere. This evolutionary machine has created that, and it’s most clearly on display in the jungle. So hopefully, I’ll make it out alive. If not, this will be the last fun conversation we’ve had, so I really deeply appreciate it. Do you think, as I mentioned before, there’s other alien civilizations out there, intelligent ones, when you look up at the skies?
Aliens
Sam Altman
I deeply want to believe that the answer is yes. I find the Fermi paradox very puzzling.
I deeply want to believe that the answer is yes. I find the Fermi paradox very puzzling.
Lex Fridman
I find it scary that intelligence is not good at handling-
I find it scary that intelligence is not good at handling-
Sam Altman
Very scary.
Very scary.
Lex Fridman
… powerful technologies. But at the same time, I think I’m pretty confident that there’s just a very large number of intelligent alien civilizations out there. It might just be really difficult to travel through space.
… powerful technologies. But at the same time, I think I’m pretty confident that there’s just a very large number of intelligent alien civilizations out there. It might just be really difficult to travel through space.
Sam Altman
Very possible.
Very possible.
Lex Fridman
And it also makes me think about the nature of intelligence. Maybe we’re really blind to what intelligence looks like, and maybe AI will help us see that. It’s not as simple as IQ tests and simple puzzle solving. There’s something bigger. What gives you hope about the future of humanity, this thing we’ve got going on, this human civilization?
And it also makes me think about the nature of intelligence. Maybe we’re really blind to what intelligence looks like, and maybe AI will help us see that. It’s not as simple as IQ tests and simple puzzle solving. There’s something bigger. What gives you hope about the future of humanity, this thing we’ve got going on, this human civilization?
Sam Altman
I think the past is a lot. I mean, we just look at what humanity has done in a not very long period of time, huge problems, deep flaws, lots to be super-ashamed of. But on the whole, very inspiring. Gives me a lot of hope.
I think the past is a lot. I mean, we just look at what humanity has done in a not very long period of time, huge problems, deep flaws, lots to be super-ashamed of. But on the whole, very inspiring. Gives me a lot of hope.
Lex Fridman
Just the trajectory of it all.
Just the trajectory of it all.
Sam Altman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
That we’re together pushing towards a better future.
That we’re together pushing towards a better future.
Sam Altman
One thing that I wonder about, is AGI going to be more like some single brain, or is it more like the scaffolding in society between all of us? You have not had a great deal of genetic drift from your great-great-great grandparents, and yet what you’re capable of is dramatically different. What you know is dramatically different. And that’s not because of biological change. I mean, you got a little bit healthier, probably. You have modern medicine, you eat better, whatever. But what you have is this scaffolding that we all contributed to built on top of. No one person is going to go build the iPhone. No one person is going to go discover all of science, and yet you get to use it. And that gives you incredible ability. And so in some sense, that we all created that, and that fills me with hope for the future. That was a very collective thing.
One thing that I wonder about, is AGI going to be more like some single brain, or is it more like the scaffolding in society between all of us? You have not had a great deal of genetic drift from your great-great-great grandparents, and yet what you’re capable of is dramatically different. What you know is dramatically different. And that’s not because of biological change. I mean, you got a little bit healthier, probably. You have modern medicine, you eat better, whatever. But what you have is this scaffolding that we all contributed to built on top of. No one person is going to go build the iPhone. No one person is going to go discover all of science, and yet you get to use it. And that gives you incredible ability. And so in some sense, that we all created that, and that fills me with hope for the future. That was a very collective thing.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, we really are standing on the shoulders of giants. You mentioned when we were talking about theatrical, dramatic AI risks that sometimes you might be afraid for your own life. Do you think about your death? Are you afraid of it?
Yeah, we really are standing on the shoulders of giants. You mentioned when we were talking about theatrical, dramatic AI risks that sometimes you might be afraid for your own life. Do you think about your death? Are you afraid of it?
Sam Altman
I mean, if I got shot tomorrow and I knew it today, I’d be like, “Oh, that’s sad. I want to see what’s going to happen. What a curious time. What an interesting time.” But I would mostly just feel very grateful for my life.
I mean, if I got shot tomorrow and I knew it today, I’d be like, “Oh, that’s sad. I want to see what’s going to happen. What a curious time. What an interesting time.” But I would mostly just feel very grateful for my life.
Lex Fridman
The moments that you did get. Yeah, me, too. It’s a pretty awesome life. I get to enjoy awesome creations of humans, which I believe ChatGPT is one of, and everything that OpenAI is doing. Sam, it’s really an honor and pleasure to talk to you again.
The moments that you did get. Yeah, me, too. It’s a pretty awesome life. I get to enjoy awesome creations of humans, which I believe ChatGPT is one of, and everything that OpenAI is doing. Sam, it’s really an honor and pleasure to talk to you again.
Sam Altman
Great to talk to you. Thank you for having me.
Great to talk to you. Thank you for having me.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Sam Altman. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Arthur C. Clarke. “It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God, but to create him.” Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Sam Altman. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Arthur C. Clarke. “It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God, but to create him.” Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Israel-Palestine Debate: Finkelstein, Destiny, M. Rabbani & Benny Morris | Lex Fridman Podcast #418
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #418 with Israel-Palestine Debate.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
The goal was to explore together the history, present and future of Israel and Palestine in a free flowing conversation. No time limits, no rules. There was a lot of tension in the room from the very beginning, and it only got more intense as we went along. And I quickly realized that this very conversation in a very real human way was a microcosm of the tensions and distance and perspectives on the topic of Israel and Palestine. For some debates, I will step in and moderate strictly to prevent emotion from boiling. For this, I saw the value in not interfering with the passion of the exchanges because that emotion in itself spoke volumes.
We did talk about the history and the future. But the anger, the frustration, the biting wit, and at times, respect and comradery were all there. Like I said, we did it in an perhaps all too human way. I will do more debates and conversations on these difficult topics and I will continue to search for hope in the midst of death and destruction, to search for our common humanity in the midst of division and hate. This thing we have going on, human civilization, the whole of it is beautiful and it’s worth figuring out how we can help it flourish together. I love you all. This is the Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Norman Finkelstein, Benny Morris, Mouin Rabbani, and Steven Bonnell.
First question is about 1948/ for Israelis, 1948 is the establishment of the state of Israel and the war of independence. For Palestinians, 1948 is the Nakba, which means catastrophe or the displacement of 700,000 Palestinians from their homes as a consequence of the war. What to you is important to understand about the events of 1948 and the period around there, ’47, ’49, that helps us understand what’s going on today and maybe helps us understand the roots of all of this that started even before 1948. I was hoping that Norm could speak first, then Benny, then Mouin, and then Steven. Norm?
The UN Special Committee on Palestine, which came into being before the UN 181 Partition Resolution. The UN Special Committee recommended two states in Palestine. There was a minority position represented by Iran, India, Yugoslavia. They supported one state. But they believed that if forced to, the two communities would figure out some sort of modus vivendi and live together. United Nations General Assembly supported partition between what it called a Jewish state and an Arab state. Now, in my reading of the record, and I understand there’s new scholarship in the subject which I’ve not read, but so far as I’ve read the record, there’s no clarity on what the United Nations General Assembly meant by a Jewish state and an Arab state, except for the fact that the Jewish state would be, demographically, the majority would be Jewish, and the Arab state demographically would be Arab.
The UNSCOP, the UN Special Committee on Palestine, it was very clear and it was reiterated many times that in recommending two states, each state, the Arab state and the Jewish state, would have to guarantee full equality of all citizens with regard to political, civil, and religious matters. Now, that does raise the question if there is absolute full equality of all citizens, both in the Jewish state and the Arab state with regard to political rights, civil rights, and religious rights. Apart from the demographic majority, it’s very unclear what it meant to call a state Jewish or call a state Arab.
In my view, the Partition Resolution was the correct decision. I do not believe that the Arab and Jewish communities could, at that point, be made to live together. I disagree with the minority position of India, Iran, and Yugoslavia. And that not being a practical option, two states was the only other option. In this regard, I would want to pay tribute to what was probably the most moving speech at the UN General Assembly proceedings by the Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko. I was very tempted to quote it at length, but I recognized that would be taking too much time. So I asked a young friend, Jamie Stern-Weiner to edit it and just get the essence of what Foreign Minister Gromyko had to say.
” During the last war,” Gromyko said, “The Jewish people underwent exceptional sorrow and suffering. Without any exaggeration, this sorrow and suffering are indescribable. Hundreds of thousands of Jews are wandering about in various countries of Europe in search of means of existence and in search of shelter. The United Nations cannot and must not regard this situation with indifference. Past experience, particularly during the Second World War, shows that no Western European state was able to provide adequate assistance for the Jewish people in defending its rights and its very existence from the violence of the Hitlerites and their allies. This is an unpleasant fact. But unfortunately, like all other facts, it must be admitted.”
Gromyko went on to say, in principle, he supports one state, or the Soviet Union supports one state. But he said, ” If relations between the Jewish and Arab populations of Palestine proved to be so bad that would be impossible to reconcile them and to ensure the peaceful coexistence of the Arabs and the Jews, the Soviet Union would support two states. I personally am not convinced that the two states would have been unsustainable in the long term if, and this is big if, the Zionist movement had been faithful to the position that proclaimed during the UNSCOP public hearings.”
At the time Ben-Gurion testified, “I want to express what we mean by a Jewish state. We mean by a Jewish state, simply a state where the majority of the people are Jews, not a state where a Jew has in any way any privilege more than anyone else. A Jewish state means a state based on absolute equality of all her citizens and on democracy. Alas, this was not to be.” As Professor Morris has written, “Zionist ideology and practice were necessarily an elementally expansionist.” And then he wrote in another book, “Transfer…” The euphemism for expulsion, “Transfer was inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism because it sought to transform a land which was Arab into a Jewish state. And a Jewish state could not have arisen without a major displacement of Arab population. And because this aim automatically produced resistance among the Arabs, which in turn persuade the Yishuv’s leaders,” the Yishuv being the Jewish community, “The Yishuv’s leaders, that a hostile Arab majority or a large minority could not remain in place if a Jewish state was to arise or safely endure.”
Or as Professor Morris retrospectively put it, “A removing of a population was needed. Without a population expulsion, a Jewish state would not have been established.” The Arab side rejected outright the partition resolution. I won’t play games with that. I know a lot of people try to prove it’s not true. It clearly, in my view, is true. The Arab side rejected outright the partition resolution. While Israeli leaders acting on the compulsions inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism, found the pretext in the course of the first Arab-Israeli war to expel the indigenous population and expand its borders. I therefore conclude that neither side was committed to the letter of the partition resolution and both sides aborted it.
And the United Nations followed suit. The United Nations, UNSCOP and then the UN General Assembly representing the will of the international community said two states is the just solution in this complex situation. The problem was that immediately with the passage of the resolution, the Arabs, Arab states and the Arabs of Palestine said no. As Norman Finkelstein said, they said no. They rejected the partition idea, the principle of partition, not just the idea of what percentage which side should get, but the principle of partition they said no to, the Jews should not have any part of Palestine for their sovereign territory. Maybe Jews could live as a minority in Palestine. That also was problematic in the eyes of the Palestinian Arab leadership.
Husayni had said, only Jews who were there before 1917 could actually get citizenship and continue to live there. But the Arabs rejected partition and the Arabs of Palestine launched, in very disorganized fashion, war against the resolution, against the implementation of the resolution, against the Jewish community in Palestine. And this was their defeat in that civil war between the two communities, while the British were withdrawing from Palestine, led to the Arab invasion, the invasion by the Arab states in May, 1948 of the country. Again, basically with the idea of eradicating or preventing the emergence of a Jewish state in line with the United Nations decision and the will of the international community.
Norman said that the Zionist enterprise, and he quoted me, meant from the beginning to transfer or expel the Arabs of Palestine or some of the Arabs of Palestine. And I think he’s quoting out of context. The context in which the statements were made that the Jewish state could only emerge if there was a transfer of Arab population was proceeded in the way I wrote it, and the way it actually happened by Arab resistance and hostilities towards the Jewish community. Had the Arabs accepted partition, there would’ve been a large Arab minority in the Jewish state which emerged in ’47. And in fact, Jewish economists and state builders took into account that there would be a large Arab minority and its needs would be cared for, et cetera.
But this was not to be because the Arabs attacked. And had they not attacked, perhaps a Jewish state with a large Arab minority could have emerged. But this didn’t happen. They went to war. The Jews resisted. And in the course of that war, Arab populations were driven out. Some were expelled, some left because Arab leaders advised them to leave or ordered them to leave. And at the end of the war, Israel said they can’t return because they just tried to destroy the Jewish state. And that’s the basic reality of what happened in ’48. The Jews created a state. The Palestinian Arabs never bothered to even try to create a state before ’48 and in the course of the 1948 war. And for that reason, they have no state to this day. The Jews do have a state because they prepared to establish a state, fought for it, and established it, hopefully lastingly.
The second point is, I think what the Soviet foreign minister at the time Andrei Gromyko said is exactly right, with one reservation. Gromyko was describing a European savagery unleashed against Europe’s Jews. At the time, it wasn’t Palestinians or Arabs. The savages and the barbarians were European to the core. It had nothing to do with developments in Palestine or the Middle East. Secondly, at the time that Gromyko was speaking, those Jewish survivors of the Holocaust and others who were in need of safe haven were still overwhelmingly on the European continent and not in Palestine.
And I think, given the scale of the savagery, I don’t think that any one state or country should have borne the responsibility for addressing this crisis. I think it should have been an international responsibility. The Soviet Union could have contributed, Germany certainly could and should have contributed, the United Kingdom and the United States which slammed their doors shut to the persecuted Jews of Europe as the Nazis were rising to power, they certainly should have played a role. But instead, what passed for the international community at the time, decided to partition Palestine. And here I think we need to judge the Partition Resolution against the realities that obtained at the time time.
Two thirds of the population of Palestine was Arab. The Yishuv, the Jewish community in Palestine, constituted about one third of the total population and controlled even less of the land within Palestine. As a preeminent Palestinian historian Walid Khalidi has pointed out, the Partition Resolution in giving roughly 55% of Palestine to the Jewish community, and I think 41, 42% to the Arab community, to the Palestinians, did not preserve the position of each community, or even favor one community at the expense of the other. Rather, it thoroughly inverted and revolutionized the relationship between the two communities.
And as many have written, the Nakba was the inevitable consequence of partition given the nature of Zionism, given the territorial disposition, given the weakness of the Palestinian community whose leadership had been largely decimated during a major revolt at the end of the 1930s, given that the Arab states were still very much under French and British influence, the Nakba was inevitable, the inevitable product of the Partition Resolution. And one last point also about the UN’s Partition Resolution is, yes, formally, that is what the international community decided on the 29th of November, 1947. It’s not a resolution that could ever have gotten through the UN General Assembly today for a very simple reason. It was a very different general assembly.
Most African, most Asian states were not yet independent. Were the resolution to be placed before the international community today, and I find it telling that the minority opinion was led by India, Iran, and Yugoslavia, I think they would’ve represented the clear majority. So partition, given what we know about Zionism, given that it was entirely predictable what would happen, given the realities on the ground in Palestine was deeply unjust, and the idea that either the Palestinians or the Arab states could have accepted such a resolution is, I think, an illusion. That was in 1947. We saw what happened in ’48 and ’49. Palestinian society was essentially destroyed. Over 80%, I believe, of Palestinians residents in the territory that became the state of Israel were either expelled or fled and ultimately were ethnically cleansed because ethnic cleansing consists of two components. It’s not just forcing people into refuge or expelling them, it’s just as importantly preventing their return. And Benny Morris has written, I think, a article about Yosef Weitz and the transfer committees. There was a very detailed initiative to prevent the return and it consisted of raising hundreds of Palestinian villages to the ground, which was systematically implemented and so on. And so Palestinians became a stateless people.
Now, what is the most important reason that no Arab state was established in Palestine? Well, since the 1930s, the Zionist leadership and the Hashemite leadership of Jordan, as it’s been thoroughly researched and written about by the Israeli-British historian Avi Shlaim, essentially colluded to prevent the establishment of an independent Arab state in Palestine in the late 1940s. There’s much more here, but I think those are the key points I would make about 1948.
I never hear about the fact that the majority of the land that was acquired happened by purchases from Jewish organizations of Palestinian Arabs of the Ottoman Empire before the mandatory period in 1920 even started. Funnily enough, king Abdullah of Jordan was quoted as saying, “The Arabs are as prodigal in selling their land as they are in weeping about it.” I never hear about the multiple times that Arabs rejected partition, rejected living with Jews, rejected any sort of state that would’ve even had any sort of Jewish exclusivity. It’s funny because it was brought up before that the partition plan was unfair, and that’s why the Arabs rejected it, as though they rejected it because it was unfair, because of the amount of land that Jews were given and not just due to the fact that Jews were given land at all, as though a 30% partition or a 25% partition would’ve been accepted when I don’t think that was the reality of the circumstances.
I feel like most of the other stuff has been said, but I noticed that whenever people talk about ’48 or the years preceding ’48, I think the worst thing that happens is there’s a cherry-picking of the facts where basically all of the blame is ascribed to this built-in idea of Zionism because of a handful of quotes or because of an ideology, we can say that transfer or population expulsion or basically the mandate of all of these Arabs being kicked off the land was always going to happen, when I think there’s a refusal sometimes as well to acknowledge that regardless of the ideas of some of the Zionist leaders, there is a political, social and military reality on the ground that they’re forced to contend with.
And unfortunately, the Arabs, because of their inability to engage in diplomacy and only to use tools of war to try to negotiate everything going on in mandatory Palestine, basically always gave the Jews a reason or an excuse to fight and acquire land through that way because of their refusal to negotiate on anything else, whether it was the partition plan in ’47, whether it was the Lausanne peace conference afterwards where Israel even offered to annex Gaza in ’51, where they offered to take in a hundred thousand refugees. Every single deal is just rejected out of hand because the Arabs don’t want a Jewish state anywhere in this region of the world.
You said that transfer was inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism. We’re not talking about circumstantial factors, a war, Arab hostility. You said it’s inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism. Now, as I said, so we won’t be accused of cherry picking. Those were 25 very densely argued pages. And then in an interview, and I could cite several quotes, but I’ll choose one, you said, “Removing a population was needed.” Let’s look at the words. “Without a population expulsion, a Jewish state would not have been established.” Now you are the one… Again, I was very surprised when I read your book here. I’m referring to “Righteous Victims.” I was very surprised when I came to that page 37, where you wrote that territorial displacement and dispossession was the chief motor of Arab resistance to Zionism. Territorial displacement and dispossession were the chief motor of Arab resistance to Zionism.
So you then went on to say, because the Arab population rationally feared territorial displacement and dispossession, it of course opposed Zionism. That’s as normal as Native Americans opposing the Euro-American manifest destiny in the history of our own country because they understood it would be at their expense. It was inbuilt and inevitable.
And so now for you to come along and say that it all happened just because of the war, that otherwise the Zionists made all these plans for a happy minority to live there, that simply does not gel. It does not cohere. It is not reconcilable with what you yourself have written. It was inevitable and inbuilt.
Now, in other situations, you’ve said that’s true with, I think it was a greater good to establish a Jewish state at the expense of the indigenous population. That’s another kind of argument that was Theodore Roosevelt’s argument in our own country. He said, we don’t want the whole of North America to remain a squalid refuge for these wigwams and teepees. We have to get rid of them and make this a great country. But he didn’t deny that it was inbuilt and inevitable.
Now, Norman has said that, I said that transfer was inbuilt into Zionism in one way or another. And this is certainly true in order to buy land, the Jews bought tracts of land on which some Arabs sometimes lived. Sometimes they bought tracts of land on which there weren’t Arab villages, but sometimes they bought land on which there were Arabs.
And according to Ottoman law, and the British, at least in the initial years of the British mandate, the law said that the people who bought the land could do what they liked with the people who didn’t own the land, who were basically squatting on the land, which is the Arab tenant farmers, which is we’re talking about a very small number actually of Arabs who were displaced as a result of land purchases in the Ottoman period or the mandate period.
But there was dispossession in one way. They didn’t possess the land. They didn’t own it, but they were removed from the land. And this did happen in Zionism. And there’s, if you like, an inevitability in Zionist ideology of buying tracts of land and starting to work it yourself and settle it with your own people and so on. That made sense.
But what we’re really talking about is what happened in 47/48. And in 47/48, the Arabs started a war. And actually people pay for their mistakes. And the Palestinians have never actually agreed to pay for their mistakes. They make mistakes, they attack, they suffer as a result.
And we see something similar going on today in the Gaza Strip. They do something terrible. They kill 1,200 Jews. They abduct 250 women and children and babies and old people and whatever. And then they start screaming, please save us from what we did because the Jews are counterattacking. And this is what happened then. And this is what’s happening now. There’s something fairly similar in the situation here.
Expulsion, and this is important, Norman, you should pay attention to this. You didn’t raise that. Expulsion transfer whenever policy of the Zionist movement before 47, it doesn’t exist in Zionist platforms of the various political parties, of the Zionist organization, of the Israeli state, of the Jewish agency. Nobody would’ve actually made it into policy because it was always a large minority. If there were people who wanted it, always a large minority of Jewish politicians and leaders would’ve said, no, this is immoral. We cannot start a state on the basis of an expulsion.
So it was never adopted and actually was never adopted as policy even in 48, even though Ben-Gurion wanted as few Arabs in the course of the war staying in the Jewish state after they attacked it. He didn’t want disloyal citizens staying there because they wouldn’t have been loyal citizens. But this made sense in the war itself. But the movement itself and its political parties never accepted it.
It’s true that in 1937, when the British, as part of the proposal by the Peel Commission to divide the country into two states, one Arab, one Jewish, which the Arabs of course rejected, Peel also recommended most of the Arabs in the Jewish state should be transferred because otherwise, if they stayed and were disloyal to the emergent Jewish state, this would cause endless disturbances, warfare, killing, and so on.
So Ben-Gurion and Weizmann latched onto this proposal by the most famous democracy in the world, the British democracy, when they proposed the idea of transfer side by side with the idea of partition because it made sense. And they said, well, if the British say so, we should also advocate it. But they never actually tried to pass it as Zionist policy, and they fairly quickly stopped even talking about transfer after 1938.
And the second, I think, impediment to that view is that long before the UN General Assembly convened to address a question of Palestine, Palestinian and Arab and other leaders as well had been warning ad infinitum that the purpose of the Zionist movement is not just to establish a Jewish state, but to establish an exclusivist Jewish state. And that transfer forced displacement was fundamental to that project. And just responding to…. Sorry, was it-
You may want to consult the book published last year by Lori Allen, “A History of False Hope”, which discusses in great detail the consistent engagement by Palestinians, their leaders, their elites, their diplomats, and so on with all these international committees.
If we look at today, the Palestinians are once again going to the International Court of Justice. They’re consistently trying to persuade the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to do his job. They have launched widespread boycott campaigns. So of course the Palestinians have engaged in military resistance. But I think the suggestion that this has always been their first and last resort and that they have somehow spurned civic action, spurned diplomacy, I think really has no basis in reality.
The issue that I run into is while you can find quotes from leaders, while you can find maybe desires expressed in diaries, I feel like it’s hard to truly ever know if there would’ve been mass transfer in the face of Arab peace, because I feel like every time there was a huge deal on the table that would’ve had a sizable Jewish and Arab population living together, the Arabs would reject it out of hand.
So for instance, when we say that transfer was inevitable, when we say that Zionists would’ve never accepted a sizable Arab population, how do you explain the acceptance of the 47 partition plan that would’ve had a huge Arab population living in the Jewish state? Is your contention that after the acceptance of that, after the establishment of that state, that Jews would’ve slowly started to expel all of these Arab citizens from their country?
Or how do you explain that in Lusanne a couple years later that Israel was willing to formally annex the Gaza Strip and make-
It was the British mandate. There was significant Arab resistance to Zionism, and that resistance was based on the fact, as you said, the fear of territorial displacement and dispossession. So you couldn’t very well expect the Zionist movement to come out in neon lights and announce, hey, we’re going to be expelling you the first chance we get. That’s not realistic.
But the fact is transfer did not occur before 1947, and Arabs later said, and since then have said that the Jews want to build a third temple on the Temple Mount as if that’s what really the mainstream of Zionism has always wanted and always strived for. But this is nonsense. It’s something that Husseini used to use as a way to mobilize masses for the cause, using religion as the way to get them to join him. The fact that Arabs said that the Zionists want to dispossess us doesn’t mean it’s true. It just means that there’s some Arabs thought that maybe said it sincerely and maybe insincerely.
But what I’m saying is that the idea of transfer wasn’t the core of Zionism. The idea of Zionism was to save the Jews who had been vastly persecuted in Eastern Europe, and incidentally in the Arab world, the Muslim world for centuries, and eventually ending up with the Holocaust. The idea of Zionism was to save the Jewish people by establishing a state or re-establishing a Jewish state on the ancient Jewish homeland, which is something that Arabs today even deny that there were Jews in Palestine or the land of Israel 2000 years ago.
Arafat famously said, “What Temple was there on Temple Mount? Maybe it was in Nablus.” Which of course is nonsense. But they had a strong connection for thousands of years to the land to which they wanted to return and return there. They found that on the land lived hundreds of thousands of Arabs, and the question was how to accommodate the vision of a Jewish state in Palestine alongside the existence of these Arab masses living on who were indigenous, in fact, to the land by that stage.
And the idea of partition because they couldn’t live together because the Arabs didn’t want to live together with the Jews. And I think the Jews also didn’t want to live together in one state with Arabs in general. The idea of partition was the thing which the Zionists accepted, okay, we can only get a small part of Palestine. The Arabs will get in 37. Most of Palestine in 1947 the ratios were changed, but we can live side by side with each other in a partitioned Palestine. And this was the essence of it.
The idea of transfer was there, but it was never adopted as policy. But in 1947/48, the Arabs attacked trying to destroy essentially the Zionist enterprise and the emerging Jewish state. And the reaction was transfer in some way, not as policy, but this is what happened on the battlefield. And this is also what Ben-Gurion at some point began to want as well.
I think Rhodes, from what I recall, correct me if I’m wrong, has quite a prominent place in Herzl’s diaries. I think Herzl was also corresponding with him and seeking his support. Cecil Rhodes, of course, was the British colonialist after whom the former white minority regime in Rhodesia was named. And Herzl also says explicitly in his diaries, that it is essential to remove the existing population from Palestine.
But the point is it has only a 1% of the diary, which is devoted to this subject. It’s not a central idea in Herzl’s thinking. What Herzl wanted, and this is what’s important, not Rhodes, I don’t think he was the model. Herzl wanted to create a liberal democratic western state in Palestine for the Jews. That was the idea. Not some imperial enterprise serving some imperial master, which is what Rhodes was about.
But to have a Jewish state, which was modeled on the western democracies in Palestine, and this incidentally was more or less what Weizmann and Ben-Gurion wanted. Ben-Gurion was more of a socialist. Weizmann was more of a liberal westerner, but they wanted to establish a social democratic or liberal state in Palestine.
And they both envisioned through most of the years of their activity that there would be an Arab minority in that Jewish state. It’s true that Ben-Gurion strived to have as small as possible an Arab minority in the Jewish state because he knew that if you want a Jewish majority state, that would be necessary, but it’s not something which they were willing to translate into actual policy.
Can you name any country yours, for example, or yours, that would be prepared to give 55%, 25%, 10% of your country to the Palestinians? Of course not. And so the issue was not the existence of Jews in Palestine. They had been there for centuries, and of course they had ties to Palestine and particularly to Jerusalem and other places going back centuries if not millennia.
But the idea of establishing an exclusively Jewish state at the expense of those who were already living there, I think it was right to reject that. And I don’t think we can look back now 75 years later and say, well, you should have accepted losing 55% of your homeland because you ended up losing 78% of it, and the remaining 22% was occupied in 1967. That’s not how things work.
And I can imagine an American rejecting giving 10% of the United States to the Palestinians, and if that rejection leads to war and you lose half your country, I doubt that 50 years from now you’re going to say, well, maybe I should have accepted that.
Now, I do believe there’s a legitimate question, had it been the case, as you said, Professor Morris, that the Zionists wanted to create a happy state with a Jewish majority, but a large Jewish minority, and if by virtue of immigration, like in our own country … in our own country, given the current trajectories, non-whites will become the majority population in the United States quite soon. And according to democratic principles, we have to accept that. So if that were the case, I would say maybe there’s an argument that had there been mass Jewish immigration that changed the demographic balance in Palestine and therefore Jews became the majority, you can make an argument in the abstract that the indigenous Arab population should have been accepting of that, just as ‘whites’ in the United States have to be accepting of the fact that the demographic majority is shifting to non-whites in our own country.
But that’s not what Zionism was about. I did write my doctoral dissertation on Zionism, and I don’t want to get now bogged down in abstract ideas, but as I suspect you know, most theorists of nationalism say there are two kinds of nationalism. One is a nationalism based on citizenship. You become a citizen, you’re integral to the country. That’s sometimes called political nationalism. And then there’s another kind of nationalism, and that says the state should not belong to its citizens, it should belong to an ethnic group. Each ethnic group should have its own state. It’s usually called the German romantic idea of nationalism.
Zionism is squarely in the German romantic idea. That was the whole point of Zionism. “We don’t want to be bundists and be one more ethnic minority in Russia. We don’t want to become citizens and just become a Jewish people in England or France. We want our own state-
Now, I personally have shied away from using the word Zionism ever since I finished my doctoral dissertation, because-
But Professor Morris, you are aware that until the Biltmore resolution in 1942, the Zionist movement never declared it was for a Jewish state. Why? Because it was politically impossible at the moment, until 1942. There’s your ideology, there are your convictions, there are your operative plans, and there’s also, separately, what you say in public. The Zionist movement couldn’t say in public, “We’re expelling all the Arabs.” They can’t say that. And they couldn’t even say, “We support a Jewish state,” until 1942.
I also think it’s interesting that when you analyze the flight of Jewish people, and I’ve seen this, I agree with you, it wasn’t just a mass expulsion from all the Arab states. There were definitely push factors. There were also pull factors. Now, I don’t know how you guys feel about the Nakba, but when the analysis of the Nakba comes in, again, it’s back to that; well, that was actually just a top-down expulsion. The retreat of wealthy Arab people in the ’30s didn’t matter. Any of the messaging from the surrounding Arab states didn’t matter. It was just an expulsion from Jewish people or people running from their lives from Jewish massacres. Again, I feel like it’s a selective critical analysis of the-
And then Mr Ben-Ami, for those of you who are listening, he was Israel’s former foreign minister, and he’s an influential historian in his own right, he says, “In fact, envoys from the Mossad and the Jewish Agency worked underground in Arab countries and Iran to encourage Jews to go to Israel. More importantly, for many Jews in Arab states, the very possibility of immigrating to Israel was the combination of millennial aspirations. It represented the consummation of a dream to take part in Israel’s resurgence as a nation.”
So this idea that they were all expelled after 1948, that’s one area, Professor Morris, I defer to expertise. That’s one of my credos in life. I don’t know the Israeli literature. But as it’s been translated in English, there’s very little solid scholarship on what happened in 1948 in the Arab countries which caused the Jews to leave.
But when you look at the other side, Arabs would out of hand reject literally any deal that apportioned any amount of that land for any state relating to Jewish people or the Israeli people. I think it was said, even on the other end of the table, that Arab Palestinians or Arabs would’ve never accepted any Jewish state whatsoever.
So it’s interesting that on the ideology part where it’s claimed that Zionists are people of exclusion and supremacy and expulsion, we can find that in diary entries, but we can find that expressed in very real terms on the Arab side, I think in all of their behavior around ’48 and earlier, where the goal was the destruction of the Israeli state, it would’ve been the dispossession of many Jewish people. It probably would’ve been the expulsion of a lot of them back to Europe. And I think that very clearly plays out in the difference between the actions of the Arabs versus some diary entries of some Jewish leaders.
The second thing is, of course, there’s no point in belittling the fact that the Palestinian Arab National Movement’s leader, Husseini, worked for the Nazis in the 1940s. He got a salary from the German foreign ministry, he raised troops among Muslims in Bosnia for the SS, and he broadcast to the Arab world calling for the murder of the Jews in the Middle East. This is what he did. And the Arabs since then have been trying to whitewash Husseini’s role. I’m not saying he was the instigator of the Holocaust, but he helped the Germans along in doing what they were doing and supported them in doing that. So this can’t be removed from the fact that the Arabs, as you say, paid a price for the Holocaust, but they also participated in various ways in helping it happen.
Suez Canal was the jugular vein of the British Empire between Europe and India, and the British came to the conclusion that they needed to secure the Suez Canal from any threat. And as the British have done so often in so many places, how do you deal with this? Well, you bring in a foreign minority, implant them amongst a hostile population, and establish a protectorate over them. I don’t think a Jewish state in Palestine had been part of British intentions, and the Balfour Declaration very specifically speaks about a Jewish national home in Palestine, in other words, a British protectorate. Things ended up taking a different course, and I think the most important development was World War II, and I think this had maybe less to do with the Holocaust and more to do with the effective bankruptcy of the United Kingdom during that war, and its inability to sustain its global empire.
It ended up giving up India, ended up giving up Palestine, and it’s in that context, I think, that we need to see the emergence of a Jewish state in Palestine, and again, a Jewish state means a state in which the Jewish community enjoys not only a demographic majority, but an uncontestable demographic majority, an uncontestable territorial hegemony, and uncontestable political supremacy. And that is also why after 1948, the nascent Israeli state confiscated, I believe, up to 90% of lands that had been previously owned by Palestinians who became citizens of Israel.
It is why the new Israeli state imposed a military government on its population of Palestinian citizens between 1948 and 1966. It is why the Israeli state effectively reduced the Palestinians living within the Israeli state, as citizens of the Israeli state, to second class citizens, on the one hand, promoting Jewish nationalism and Jewish nationalist parties, on the other hand, doing everything within its power to suppress and eliminate Palestinian or Arab nationalist movements. And that’s why today there’s a consensus among all major human rights organizations that Israel is an apartheid state, what the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem describes a regime of Jewish supremacy between the river and the sea.
As far as the actual complicity of the Palestinian Arabs, if you look at Raul Hilberg’s three volume classic work, The Destruction of the European Jury, he has in those 1,000+ pages, one sentence on the role of the mufti of Jerusalem, and that I think is probably an overstatement, but we’ll leave it aside. The only two points I would make aside from the Holocaust point is number one, I do think the transfer discussion is useful because it indicates that there was a rational reason behind the Arab resistance to Jewish or Zionist immigration to Palestine, the fear of territorial displacement and dispossession.
And number two, there are two issues. One is the history, and the second is being responsible for your words. Now, some people accuse me of speaking very slowly, and they’re advised on YouTube to turn up the speed twice to three times whenever I’m on. One of the reasons I speak slowly is because I attach value to every word I say, and it is discomforting, disorienting, where you have a person who’s produced a voluminous corpus, rich in insights, and rich in archival sources who seems to disown each and every word that you pluck from that corpus by claiming that it’s either out of context or it’s cherry-picking. Words count, and I agree with Lex, everybody has the right to rescind what they’ve said in the past, but what you cannot claim is that you didn’t say what you said.
And the Christian world owes the Jews because it persecuted them for 2,000 years. This debt we’re now beginning to repay with the 1917 declaration favoring Zionism, but it’s also worth remembering that the Jews weren’t proxies or attached to the British imperial endeavor. They were happy to receive British support in 1917 and then subsequently when the British ruled Palestine for 20, 30 years, but they weren’t part of the British imperial design or mission. They wanted a state for themselves. The Jews happy to have the British support them, happy to date to have the Americans support Israel, but it’s not because we’re stooges or extensions of American imperial interests. The British incidentally always described in Arab narratives of propaganda as consistent supporters of Zionism, they weren’t. The first British rulers in Palestine, 1917, 1920-
And this is the driving ideology behind the massacre of the Jews on October 7th, which brought down on the Gaza Strip, and I think with the intention by the Hamas of the Israeli counter offensive because they knew that that counter offensive would result in many Palestinian dead because the Hamas fighters and their weaponry and so on were embedded in the population in Gaza, and they hoped to benefit from this in the eyes of world public opinion as Israel chased these Hamas people and their ammunition dumps and so on and killed lots of Palestinian civilians in the process. All of this was understood by Sinwar, by the head of the Hamas, and he strived for that, but initially he wanted to kill as many Jews as he could in the border areas around the Gaza Strip.
Secondly, I think there are quite a few indications in the factual record that raise serious questions about the accusations of the genocidal intent and genocidal practice of what happened on October 7th. And my final point would be, I don’t think I should take your word for it, I don’t think you should take my word for it. I think what we need here is a proper independent international investigation, and the reason we need that-
That’s your description of the Lebanon War. As I say, that’s when I first got involved in the conflict. I am a voracious reader. I read everything on the Lebanon War. I would say there’s not a single account of the Lebanon War in which the estimates are between 15 and 20,000 Palestinian, Lebanese were killed, overwhelmingly civilians, the biggest bloodletting until the current Gaza genocide. Biggest bloodletting. I would say I can’t think of a single mainstream account that remotely approximates what you just said. So leaving aside… I can name the books. Voluminous, huge volumes. I’ll just take one example. Now you will remember, because I think you served in Lebanon in ’82. Am I correct on that?
I think that when we analyze different attacks or when we talk about the conduct of the military, it’s important to understand, prospectively from the unit of analysis of the actual military committing the acts, what’s happening and what are the decisions being made rather than just saying retrospectively, “Oh, well, a lot of civilians died. Not very many military people died, comparatively speaking, so it must have been war crimes,” especially when you’ve got another side, I’ll fast-forward to Hamas, that intentionally attempts to induce those same civilian numbers, because Hamas is guilty of any war crime that you would potentially accuse. And this is according to the Amnesty International, people that Norm loves to cite, Hamas is guilty of all of these same war crimes, of them failing to take care of their civilian population, of them essentially utilizing human shields to try to fire rockets, free from attacks-
Now, a lot of people have looked at the court’s ruling of the 26th of January and focused on the fact that the court did not order a ceasefire. I actually wasn’t expecting it to order a ceasefire, and I wasn’t surprised that it didn’t because in the other cases that the court has considered, most prominently Bosnia and Myanmar, it also didn’t order a ceasefire, and South Africa in requesting a ceasefire also didn’t ask the court to render an opinion on the legitimacy, or lack thereof, of Israel’s military operation. From my perspective, the key issue on the 26th of January was whether the court would simply dismiss the case or decide to proceed with it.
This is not the same as saying there’s no distinction between militants and civilians in Gaza. His statement here is actually fully compliant with international law to the letter because if you are storing military supplies in civilian areas, these things become military targets, and you’re allowed to do proportionality assessments afterwards. So, if this is supposed to be one of many quotes that they’ve shown that is supposed to demonstrate genocidal intent, but it is very easily explained by military intent or by a conflict between two parties-
We are not yet at the court. The evidence in their minds compels the conclusion that genocide is being committed. I am willing, because I happen to know Mr. Dugard personally, and I have corresponded with Vaughan Lowe, I’ve heard their claim, I’ve read the report. I would say they make a very strong case, but let’s agree plausible. Now, here’s a question, if somebody qualifies for an Olympic team, let’s say a regional person qualifies for an Olympic team, it doesn’t mean they’re going to be on the Olympic team, it doesn’t mean they’re going to win a gold medal, a silver medal, or a bronze medal-
But the best deal that Israel could ever offer them, they were offered, which essentially was 95% of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, half of the old city of Jerusalem, some sort of joint control of the Temple Mount and the Gaza Strip of course in full. And the Palestinians said no to this deal and nobody really knows why Arafat said no. Some people think he was trying to hold out for slightly better terms, but my reading is that he was constitutionally, psychologically incapable of signing off on a two-state deal, meaning acceptance of the existence of a Jewish state. This was really the problem.
And I think it was in that context that had there been a joint US-Soviet push for an Arab-Israeli and Israeli-Palestinian resolution that incorporated both an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 lines and the establishment of a Palestinian state in the occupied territories, I think there was a very reasonable prospect for that being achieved. It ended up being aborted, I think for several reasons, and ultimately the Egyptian President Anwar Sadat decided for reasons we can discuss later to launch a separate unilateral initiative for Israeli Egyptian rather than Arab-Israeli peace. And I think once that set in motion, the prospects disappeared because Israel essentially saw its most powerful adversary removed from the equation and felt that this would give it a free hand in the occupied territories also in Lebanon to get rid of the PLO and so on.
You ask when were we closest, and I can’t give you an answer of when we were closest. I can only tell you when I think we could have been close and that was a lost opportunity. If we look at the situation today, there’s been a lot of discussion about a two-state settlement. My own view, and I’ve written about this, I don’t buy the arguments of the naysayers that we have passed the so-called point of no return with respect to a two-state settlement. Certainly if you look at the Israeli position in the occupied territories, I would argue it’s more tenuous than was the French position in Algeria in 1954, than was a British position in Ireland in 1916, than was a Ethiopian position in Eritrea in 1990. And so as a matter of practicality, as a matter of principle, I do think the establishment of a Palestinian state in the occupied territories remains realistic.
I think the question that we now need to ask ourselves, it’s one I’m certainly asking myself since October 7th and looking at Israel’s genocidal campaign, but also looking at larger questions, is it desirable? Can you have peace with what increasingly appears to be an irrational genocidal state that seeks to confront and resolve each and every political challenge with violence? And that reacts to its failure to achieve solutions to political challenges with violence by applying even more violence, that has an insatiable lust for Palestinian territory, that a genocidal apartheid state that seems increasingly incapable of even conceiving of peaceful coexistence with the other people on that land. So I’m very pessimistic that a solution is possible.
I grew up in Western Europe in the long shadow of the Second World War. I think we can all agree that there could have been no peace in Europe had certain regimes on that continent not been removed from power. I look at Southeast Asia in the late 1970s, and I think we all agreed that there could not have been peace that region had the Khmer Rouge not been ousted. I look at Southern Africa during the 1990s and I think we can all be agreed that had the white minority regimes that ruled Zimbabwe and South Africa not been dismantled, there could not have been peace in that region. And although I think it’s worth having a discussion, I do think it’s now legitimate question to ask, can there be peace without dismantling the Zionist regime?
And I make a very clear distinction between the Israeli state and its institutions on the one hand and the Israeli people who I think regardless of our discussion about the history, I think you can now talk about an Israeli people and the people that have developed rights over time and a formula for peaceful coexistence with them will need to be found, which is a separate matter from dismantling the Israeli state and its institutions. And again, I haven’t reached clear conclusions about this except to say as a practical matter, I think a two state settlement remains feasible. But I think there are very legitimate questions about its desirability and about whether peace can be achieved in the Middle East with the persistence of an irrational genocidal apartheid regime. Particularly because Israeli society is beginning to develop many extremely, extremely distasteful supremacist, dehumanizing aspects that I think also stand in the way of coexistence that are being fed by this regime.
I mean you said as much about the institution, at least to the Zionist government. Israel’s government is probably not going anywhere. All of the other surrounding Arab states have accepted that, or at least most of them down in the Gulf. Egypt and Jordan have accepted that the Palestinians need to accept it too. The Israeli state or the state apparatus is not going anywhere, and at some point they need to realize like, “Hey, we need a leader that’s going to come out and represent us, represent all of us, is willing to take political risks, is willing to negotiate some lasting piece for us, and it’s not going to be the international community or some invocation of international law or some invocation of morality or justice that’s going to extricate us from this conflict. It’s going to take some actual difficult political maneuvering on the ground-“
That was their worry that the Palestinians were becoming too moderate. And unless you understand that, you can’t understand the June 1982 Lebanon war. The purpose of the June 1982 Lebanon war was to liquidate the PLO in Southern Lebanon because they were too moderate the Palestinian peace offensive. I’m going to have to fast-forward. There are many events. There was the First Intifada, then there’s the Oslo Accord, and let’s now go to the heart of the issue, namely the 2000-2001 negotiations. Well, the negotiations are divided into three parts for the sake of listeners. There’s Camp David in July 2000, there are the Clinton parameters in December 2000, and then there are negotiations in Taba in Egypt in 2001. Those are the three phases. Now, I have studied the record probably to the point of insanity because there are so many details you have to master.
Ben-Ami says, “I think the Israeli offer was reasonable.” That’s how he sees it. But what is the standard of reasonable? My standard is what does international law say? International law says the settlements are illegal. Israel wants to keep all the settlement blocks. 15 judges, all 15 in the wall decision in July 2004, all 15 judges, including the American judge, Buergenthal ruled the settlements are illegal under international law. They want to keep 80% of the settlers under international law. All the settlers are illegal in the West Bank. They want to keep large parts of East Jerusalem. But under international law, East Jerusalem is occupied Palestinian territory. That’s what the international-
So if you use as the baseline what the UN General Assembly has said and what the International Court of Justice has said, if you use that baseline, international law, by that baseline, all the concessions came from the Palestinian side. Every single concession came from the Palestinian side. None came from the Israeli side. They may have accepted less than what they wanted, but it was still beyond what international law allocated to them. Now you say-
Dennis Ross decided to be the philosopher king. He’s going to decide on the basis of needs. Well, if you asked me, since Gaza is one of the densest places on Earth, it needs [inaudible 03:58:50]-
You might consider international opinion on things, but at the end of the day, it’s the bilateral negotiations, oftentimes historically started in secret, independent of the international community, that end up shaping what the final agreements look like. I think the issue with this broad appeal to international law is, again, going back to my earlier point about all of the euphemistic words, all it simply does is drive Palestinian expectations up to a level that is never going to be satisfied. For instance, you can throw that ICJ opinion all you want, it was an advisory opinion, that came in 2004, how Palestinians gained more or less land since that 2004 advisory opinion was issued.
So you need to take into account that when you’re advocating bilateral negotiations that, effectively, that gives each of the parties veto power. And in the current circumstances, the Palestinians have already recognized Israel.
But let’s get to the issue that Mouin wrote. Here’s what you said. You said, formally… You said, “Yes, it’s true, the Palestinians recognize Israel.” But then you said, “Viscerally, in their hearts-“
And just as a matter of historical record, beginning in the early 1970s, there was fierce debate within the Palestinian national movement about whether to accept or reject. And there were three schools of thought. There was one that would accept nothing less than the total liberation of Palestine. There was a second that accepted what was called the establishment of a fighting national authority on Palestinian soil, which they saw-
But for some reason, they’ve never had a leader that convinced them of that as much, that Arafat thought that if he held on, there was always a better deal around the corner, that Abbas is more concerned with trying to maintain any legitimacy amongst Palestinians than actually trying to negotiate anything realistic with Israel, that Palestinians are always incentivized to feel like as long as they keep fighting, either the international community is going to save them with the 5 millionth UN resolution condemning whatever, that another ICJ advisory opinion is finally going to lead to the expulsion of half a million Jews from the West Bank, or that some other international body, the ICJ and the genocide charge, is going to come and save the Palestinians.
As long as they, in their mind, feel like somebody is coming to save them, then they feel like they’re going to have the ability to get something better in the future. But the reality is all of the good partners for peace that the Palestinians had have completely and utterly abandoned them; Egypt, Jordan, the Gulf states. Whether you’re talking bilateral peace or the Abraham Accords, most of the Arab leaders, in negotiating peace with Israel, have just not had as much of an interest in maintaining the rights and the representations of what the Palestinian people want.
And the only people they have today to draw legitimacy from or to have on their side to argue with them are people that, I guess, write books or tweet or people in the international community that do resolutions or Amnesty International reports. And the reality is, we can scream until we’re blue in the face on these things, none of it has gotten any closer to helping the Palestinians in any sense of the word.
The condition has only gotten worse. The settlements only continue to expand. The military operations are only to get more brutal. The blockade is going to continue to have worse effects. As long as we use international law as the basis and there isn’t a strong Sadat-like Palestinian leader that’s willing to come up and confront Israel with the brave, peaceful negotiations to force them to acquiesce, nothing is going to happen.
And I think that the issue you come up with is, whether it’s people like Norm that talk about how brave the October 7th attacks were or how much respect they have for those fighters, Israel, in a way… And I think people have said as much about Netanyahu. The right wants violence from the Palestinians because it always gives them a perpetual excuse to further the conflict.
“Well, we have to go in on October 7th and we’ve got to remove Hamas. Well, we can’t trust these people in the West. We have to do the night raids because the Second Intifada made us feel like the Palestinian people didn’t want trust with us.”
I feel like the biggest thing that would force Israel to change its path would be an actual, a real… not for two weeks, but an actual peaceful Palestinian leader, somebody committed to peace, that is able to apply those standards and hold the entire region of Palestine to those standards. Because I think, over time, the mounting pressure from without the international community and the mounting pressure from within because Israel hosts a lot of its own criticism, if we talk about B’Tselem, we talk about Haaretz, Israel will host a lot of its own criticism.
I think that that pressure would force Israel towards an actual peace agreement, but it’s never going to come through violence. Historically, it hasn’t. And in the modern day, violence has just hurt the Palestinians more and more.
And then when the international pressure is always ’67 borders, infinite right of return for refugees, and a total withdrawal of Israel from all these lands to even start negotiations, I just don’t see, realistically, on the Palestinian side, no negotiations are ever going to start in a place that Israel’s willing to accept.
And the reason that Israel agreed to relinquish the occupied Egyptian Sinai and the reason that Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty was signed in 1979 is because Israel, in 1973, recognized that its military superiority was ultimately no match for Egypt’s determination to recover its occupied territories and that there would come a point when Egypt would find a way to extract an unbearable price.
So the Israelis are dead set on restoring that deterrence capability. On the Arab side, and I know Mouin and I have disagreed on it, and we’re allowed to disagree, I think the Arab side, the lesson they learned from October 7th is Israelis aren’t as strong as we thought they were.
But this is a people that never has and, I believe, never will surrender. At a certain point, I think Israel and its leaders will have to come to the realization that by hook or by crook, these people are going to achieve their inalienable and legitimate national rights, and that is going to be a reality.
One more question, since we have two historians here. Briefly, from a history perspective, what do you hope your legacy is as historians, Benny and Norm, will be of the work that you’ve put out there? Maybe Norm, you can go first, and try to say briefly.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Norman Finkelstein, Benny Morris, Mouin Rabbani, and Steven Bonnell. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Lyndon B. Johnson. “Peace is a journey of a thousand miles, and it must be taken one step at a time.” Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 4:42 – 1948
- 1:03:14 – Partition
- 2:07:47 – October 7
- 3:01:59 – Gaza
- 3:28:34 – Peace
- 4:33:18 – Hope for the future
Introduction
Benny Morris
That’s a good point. No, no, that’s a good point.
That’s a good point. No, no, that’s a good point.
Norman Finkelstein
Now, some people accuse me of speaking very slowly, and they’re advised on YouTube to turn up the speed twice to three times whenever I’m on. One of the reasons I speak slowly is because I attach value to every word I say.
Now, some people accuse me of speaking very slowly, and they’re advised on YouTube to turn up the speed twice to three times whenever I’m on. One of the reasons I speak slowly is because I attach value to every word I say.
Steven Bonnell
Norman say this all over and over and over again, “I only deal in facts. I don’t deal in hypotheticals. I only deal in facts. I only deal in facts.” And that seems to be the case except for when the facts are completely and totally contrary to the particular point you’re trying to push. The idea that Jews would’ve out of hand rejected any state that had Arabs on it or always had a plan of expulsion, it’s just betrayed by the acceptance of the 47 partition plan.
Norman say this all over and over and over again, “I only deal in facts. I don’t deal in hypotheticals. I only deal in facts. I only deal in facts.” And that seems to be the case except for when the facts are completely and totally contrary to the particular point you’re trying to push. The idea that Jews would’ve out of hand rejected any state that had Arabs on it or always had a plan of expulsion, it’s just betrayed by the acceptance of the 47 partition plan.
Norman Finkelstein
I don’t think you understand politics.
I don’t think you understand politics.
Benny Morris
They forced the British to prevent immigration of Jews from Europe and reaching safe shores in Palestine. That’s what they did. And they knew that the Jews were being persecuted in Europe at the time.
They forced the British to prevent immigration of Jews from Europe and reaching safe shores in Palestine. That’s what they did. And they knew that the Jews were being persecuted in Europe at the time.
Mouin Rabbani
Was Palestine the only spot of land on Earth?
Was Palestine the only spot of land on Earth?
Benny Morris
Yes. Basically that was the problem. The Jews couldn’t immigrate anywhere else.
Yes. Basically that was the problem. The Jews couldn’t immigrate anywhere else.
Mouin Rabbani
What about your great friends in Britain, the architects of the Balfour Declaration?
What about your great friends in Britain, the architects of the Balfour Declaration?
Benny Morris
By the late 1930s-
By the late 1930s-
Mouin Rabbani
What about the United States?
What about the United States?
Benny Morris
… they weren’t happy to take in Jews, and the Americans weren’t happy to take in Jews.
… they weren’t happy to take in Jews, and the Americans weren’t happy to take in Jews.
Mouin Rabbani
And why are Palestinians who were not Europeans, who had zero role in the rise of Nazism, who had no relation to any of this, why are they somehow uniquely responsible for what happened in Europe and uniquely-
And why are Palestinians who were not Europeans, who had zero role in the rise of Nazism, who had no relation to any of this, why are they somehow uniquely responsible for what happened in Europe and uniquely-
Benny Morris
Because maybe helping the cause is the only safe haven for Jews.
Because maybe helping the cause is the only safe haven for Jews.
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris, because of your logic, and I’m not disputing it, that’s why October 7th happened.
Professor Morris, because of your logic, and I’m not disputing it, that’s why October 7th happened.
Steven Bonnell
Oh my God.
Oh my God.
Norman Finkelstein
Because there was no options left for those people.
Because there was no options left for those people.
Benny Morris
The Hamas guys who attacked the kibbutzim, apart from the attacks on the military sites, when they attacked the kibbutzim, were out to kill civilians and they killed family after family, house after house.
The Hamas guys who attacked the kibbutzim, apart from the attacks on the military sites, when they attacked the kibbutzim, were out to kill civilians and they killed family after family, house after house.
Norman Finkelstein
Talk fast so people think that you’re coherent.
Talk fast so people think that you’re coherent.
Steven Bonnell
I’m just reading from the UN.
I’m just reading from the UN.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah. But you think…
Yeah. But you think…
Steven Bonnell
I know you like them sometimes, only when they agree with you though. That you’ve lied about this particular instance in the past. Those kids weren’t just on the beaches is often stated in articles. Those kids were literally coming out of a previously identified Hamas compound that they had operated from. They literally… You could Google it.
I know you like them sometimes, only when they agree with you though. That you’ve lied about this particular instance in the past. Those kids weren’t just on the beaches is often stated in articles. Those kids were literally coming out of a previously identified Hamas compound that they had operated from. They literally… You could Google it.
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Bonnell.
Mr. Bonnell.
Steven Bonnell
You could Google it.
You could Google it.
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Bonnell.
Mr. Bonnell.
Steven Bonnell
Mr. Finkelstein.
Mr. Finkelstein.
Norman Finkelstein
With all due respect, you’re such a fantastic moron. It’s terrifying.
With all due respect, you’re such a fantastic moron. It’s terrifying.
Lex Fridman
The following is a debate on the topic of Israel and Palestine with Norman Finkelstein, Benny Morris, Mouin Rabbani and Steven Bonnell, also known online as Destiny. Norm and Benny are historians. Mouin is a Middle East analyst. And Steven is a political commentator and streamer. All four have spoken and debated extensively on this topic. The goal for this debate was not for anyone to win or to score points. It wasn’t to get views or likes. I never care about those. And I think there are probably much easier ways to get those things if I did care.
The following is a debate on the topic of Israel and Palestine with Norman Finkelstein, Benny Morris, Mouin Rabbani and Steven Bonnell, also known online as Destiny. Norm and Benny are historians. Mouin is a Middle East analyst. And Steven is a political commentator and streamer. All four have spoken and debated extensively on this topic. The goal for this debate was not for anyone to win or to score points. It wasn’t to get views or likes. I never care about those. And I think there are probably much easier ways to get those things if I did care.
The goal was to explore together the history, present and future of Israel and Palestine in a free flowing conversation. No time limits, no rules. There was a lot of tension in the room from the very beginning, and it only got more intense as we went along. And I quickly realized that this very conversation in a very real human way was a microcosm of the tensions and distance and perspectives on the topic of Israel and Palestine. For some debates, I will step in and moderate strictly to prevent emotion from boiling. For this, I saw the value in not interfering with the passion of the exchanges because that emotion in itself spoke volumes.
We did talk about the history and the future. But the anger, the frustration, the biting wit, and at times, respect and comradery were all there. Like I said, we did it in an perhaps all too human way. I will do more debates and conversations on these difficult topics and I will continue to search for hope in the midst of death and destruction, to search for our common humanity in the midst of division and hate. This thing we have going on, human civilization, the whole of it is beautiful and it’s worth figuring out how we can help it flourish together. I love you all. This is the Lex Fridman Podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Norman Finkelstein, Benny Morris, Mouin Rabbani, and Steven Bonnell.
1948
First question is about 1948/ for Israelis, 1948 is the establishment of the state of Israel and the war of independence. For Palestinians, 1948 is the Nakba, which means catastrophe or the displacement of 700,000 Palestinians from their homes as a consequence of the war. What to you is important to understand about the events of 1948 and the period around there, ’47, ’49, that helps us understand what’s going on today and maybe helps us understand the roots of all of this that started even before 1948. I was hoping that Norm could speak first, then Benny, then Mouin, and then Steven. Norm?
Norman Finkelstein
After World War II, the British decided that they didn’t want to deal with the Palestine question anymore and the ball was thrown into the court of the United Nations. Now, as I read the record, the UN was not attempting to arbitrate or adjudicate rights and wrongs. It was confronting a very practical problem. There were two national communities in Palestine and there were irreconcilable differences on fundamental questions, most importantly, looking at the historic record on the question of immigration, and associate with the question of immigration, the question of land.
After World War II, the British decided that they didn’t want to deal with the Palestine question anymore and the ball was thrown into the court of the United Nations. Now, as I read the record, the UN was not attempting to arbitrate or adjudicate rights and wrongs. It was confronting a very practical problem. There were two national communities in Palestine and there were irreconcilable differences on fundamental questions, most importantly, looking at the historic record on the question of immigration, and associate with the question of immigration, the question of land.
The UN Special Committee on Palestine, which came into being before the UN 181 Partition Resolution. The UN Special Committee recommended two states in Palestine. There was a minority position represented by Iran, India, Yugoslavia. They supported one state. But they believed that if forced to, the two communities would figure out some sort of modus vivendi and live together. United Nations General Assembly supported partition between what it called a Jewish state and an Arab state. Now, in my reading of the record, and I understand there’s new scholarship in the subject which I’ve not read, but so far as I’ve read the record, there’s no clarity on what the United Nations General Assembly meant by a Jewish state and an Arab state, except for the fact that the Jewish state would be, demographically, the majority would be Jewish, and the Arab state demographically would be Arab.
The UNSCOP, the UN Special Committee on Palestine, it was very clear and it was reiterated many times that in recommending two states, each state, the Arab state and the Jewish state, would have to guarantee full equality of all citizens with regard to political, civil, and religious matters. Now, that does raise the question if there is absolute full equality of all citizens, both in the Jewish state and the Arab state with regard to political rights, civil rights, and religious rights. Apart from the demographic majority, it’s very unclear what it meant to call a state Jewish or call a state Arab.
In my view, the Partition Resolution was the correct decision. I do not believe that the Arab and Jewish communities could, at that point, be made to live together. I disagree with the minority position of India, Iran, and Yugoslavia. And that not being a practical option, two states was the only other option. In this regard, I would want to pay tribute to what was probably the most moving speech at the UN General Assembly proceedings by the Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko. I was very tempted to quote it at length, but I recognized that would be taking too much time. So I asked a young friend, Jamie Stern-Weiner to edit it and just get the essence of what Foreign Minister Gromyko had to say.
” During the last war,” Gromyko said, “The Jewish people underwent exceptional sorrow and suffering. Without any exaggeration, this sorrow and suffering are indescribable. Hundreds of thousands of Jews are wandering about in various countries of Europe in search of means of existence and in search of shelter. The United Nations cannot and must not regard this situation with indifference. Past experience, particularly during the Second World War, shows that no Western European state was able to provide adequate assistance for the Jewish people in defending its rights and its very existence from the violence of the Hitlerites and their allies. This is an unpleasant fact. But unfortunately, like all other facts, it must be admitted.”
Gromyko went on to say, in principle, he supports one state, or the Soviet Union supports one state. But he said, ” If relations between the Jewish and Arab populations of Palestine proved to be so bad that would be impossible to reconcile them and to ensure the peaceful coexistence of the Arabs and the Jews, the Soviet Union would support two states. I personally am not convinced that the two states would have been unsustainable in the long term if, and this is big if, the Zionist movement had been faithful to the position that proclaimed during the UNSCOP public hearings.”
At the time Ben-Gurion testified, “I want to express what we mean by a Jewish state. We mean by a Jewish state, simply a state where the majority of the people are Jews, not a state where a Jew has in any way any privilege more than anyone else. A Jewish state means a state based on absolute equality of all her citizens and on democracy. Alas, this was not to be.” As Professor Morris has written, “Zionist ideology and practice were necessarily an elementally expansionist.” And then he wrote in another book, “Transfer…” The euphemism for expulsion, “Transfer was inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism because it sought to transform a land which was Arab into a Jewish state. And a Jewish state could not have arisen without a major displacement of Arab population. And because this aim automatically produced resistance among the Arabs, which in turn persuade the Yishuv’s leaders,” the Yishuv being the Jewish community, “The Yishuv’s leaders, that a hostile Arab majority or a large minority could not remain in place if a Jewish state was to arise or safely endure.”
Or as Professor Morris retrospectively put it, “A removing of a population was needed. Without a population expulsion, a Jewish state would not have been established.” The Arab side rejected outright the partition resolution. I won’t play games with that. I know a lot of people try to prove it’s not true. It clearly, in my view, is true. The Arab side rejected outright the partition resolution. While Israeli leaders acting on the compulsions inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism, found the pretext in the course of the first Arab-Israeli war to expel the indigenous population and expand its borders. I therefore conclude that neither side was committed to the letter of the partition resolution and both sides aborted it.
Lex Fridman
Thank you, Norm. Norm asked that you make a lengthy statement in the beginning. Benny, I hope it’s okay to call everybody by their first name in the name of camaraderie. Norm has quoted several things you said. Perhaps you can comment broadly on the question of 1948 and maybe respond to the things that Norm said.
Thank you, Norm. Norm asked that you make a lengthy statement in the beginning. Benny, I hope it’s okay to call everybody by their first name in the name of camaraderie. Norm has quoted several things you said. Perhaps you can comment broadly on the question of 1948 and maybe respond to the things that Norm said.
Benny Morris
Yeah. UNSCOP, the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine recommended partition. The majority of UNSCOP recommended partition, which was accepted by the UN General Assembly in November, 1947. Essentially, looking back to the Peel Commission in 1937, 10 years earlier, a British Commission had looked at the problem of Palestine, the two warring national groups who refused to live together, if you like, or consolidate a unitary state between them. And Peel said there should be two states. That’s the principle. The country must be partitioned in two states. This would give a modicum of justice to both sides, if not all their demands, of course.
Yeah. UNSCOP, the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine recommended partition. The majority of UNSCOP recommended partition, which was accepted by the UN General Assembly in November, 1947. Essentially, looking back to the Peel Commission in 1937, 10 years earlier, a British Commission had looked at the problem of Palestine, the two warring national groups who refused to live together, if you like, or consolidate a unitary state between them. And Peel said there should be two states. That’s the principle. The country must be partitioned in two states. This would give a modicum of justice to both sides, if not all their demands, of course.
And the United Nations followed suit. The United Nations, UNSCOP and then the UN General Assembly representing the will of the international community said two states is the just solution in this complex situation. The problem was that immediately with the passage of the resolution, the Arabs, Arab states and the Arabs of Palestine said no. As Norman Finkelstein said, they said no. They rejected the partition idea, the principle of partition, not just the idea of what percentage which side should get, but the principle of partition they said no to, the Jews should not have any part of Palestine for their sovereign territory. Maybe Jews could live as a minority in Palestine. That also was problematic in the eyes of the Palestinian Arab leadership.
Husayni had said, only Jews who were there before 1917 could actually get citizenship and continue to live there. But the Arabs rejected partition and the Arabs of Palestine launched, in very disorganized fashion, war against the resolution, against the implementation of the resolution, against the Jewish community in Palestine. And this was their defeat in that civil war between the two communities, while the British were withdrawing from Palestine, led to the Arab invasion, the invasion by the Arab states in May, 1948 of the country. Again, basically with the idea of eradicating or preventing the emergence of a Jewish state in line with the United Nations decision and the will of the international community.
Norman said that the Zionist enterprise, and he quoted me, meant from the beginning to transfer or expel the Arabs of Palestine or some of the Arabs of Palestine. And I think he’s quoting out of context. The context in which the statements were made that the Jewish state could only emerge if there was a transfer of Arab population was proceeded in the way I wrote it, and the way it actually happened by Arab resistance and hostilities towards the Jewish community. Had the Arabs accepted partition, there would’ve been a large Arab minority in the Jewish state which emerged in ’47. And in fact, Jewish economists and state builders took into account that there would be a large Arab minority and its needs would be cared for, et cetera.
But this was not to be because the Arabs attacked. And had they not attacked, perhaps a Jewish state with a large Arab minority could have emerged. But this didn’t happen. They went to war. The Jews resisted. And in the course of that war, Arab populations were driven out. Some were expelled, some left because Arab leaders advised them to leave or ordered them to leave. And at the end of the war, Israel said they can’t return because they just tried to destroy the Jewish state. And that’s the basic reality of what happened in ’48. The Jews created a state. The Palestinian Arabs never bothered to even try to create a state before ’48 and in the course of the 1948 war. And for that reason, they have no state to this day. The Jews do have a state because they prepared to establish a state, fought for it, and established it, hopefully lastingly.
Lex Fridman
When you say hostility, in case people are not familiar, there was a full on war where Arab states invaded and Israel won that war.
When you say hostility, in case people are not familiar, there was a full on war where Arab states invaded and Israel won that war.
Benny Morris
Let me just add to clarify. The war had two parts to it. The first part was the Arab community in Palestine, its militiamen attacked the Jews from November, 1947. In other words, from the day after the UN Partition Resolution was passed, Arab gunmen were busy shooting up Jews, and that snowballed into a full scale civil war between the two communities in Palestine. In May, 1948, a second stage began in the war in which the Arab states invaded, the new state attacked the new state, and they too were defeated. And thus the state of Israel emerged. In the course of this two stage war, a vast Palestinian refugee problem occurred.
Let me just add to clarify. The war had two parts to it. The first part was the Arab community in Palestine, its militiamen attacked the Jews from November, 1947. In other words, from the day after the UN Partition Resolution was passed, Arab gunmen were busy shooting up Jews, and that snowballed into a full scale civil war between the two communities in Palestine. In May, 1948, a second stage began in the war in which the Arab states invaded, the new state attacked the new state, and they too were defeated. And thus the state of Israel emerged. In the course of this two stage war, a vast Palestinian refugee problem occurred.
Lex Fridman
And so after that, the transfer, the expulsion, the thing that people call the Nakba happened. Mouin, could you speak to 1948 and the historical significance of it?
And so after that, the transfer, the expulsion, the thing that people call the Nakba happened. Mouin, could you speak to 1948 and the historical significance of it?
Mouin Rabbani
Sure. There’s a lot to unpack here. I’ll try to limit myself to just a few points regarding Zionism and transfer. I think Chaim Weizmann, the head of the world’s Zionist organization, had it exactly right when he said that the objective of Zionism is to make Palestine as Jewish as England is English or France is French. In other words, as Norman explained, a Jewish state requires Jewish political demographic and territorial supremacy. Without those three elements, the state would be Jewish in name only. And I think what distinguishes Zionism is its insistence, supremacy and exclusivity. That would be my first point.
Sure. There’s a lot to unpack here. I’ll try to limit myself to just a few points regarding Zionism and transfer. I think Chaim Weizmann, the head of the world’s Zionist organization, had it exactly right when he said that the objective of Zionism is to make Palestine as Jewish as England is English or France is French. In other words, as Norman explained, a Jewish state requires Jewish political demographic and territorial supremacy. Without those three elements, the state would be Jewish in name only. And I think what distinguishes Zionism is its insistence, supremacy and exclusivity. That would be my first point.
The second point is, I think what the Soviet foreign minister at the time Andrei Gromyko said is exactly right, with one reservation. Gromyko was describing a European savagery unleashed against Europe’s Jews. At the time, it wasn’t Palestinians or Arabs. The savages and the barbarians were European to the core. It had nothing to do with developments in Palestine or the Middle East. Secondly, at the time that Gromyko was speaking, those Jewish survivors of the Holocaust and others who were in need of safe haven were still overwhelmingly on the European continent and not in Palestine.
And I think, given the scale of the savagery, I don’t think that any one state or country should have borne the responsibility for addressing this crisis. I think it should have been an international responsibility. The Soviet Union could have contributed, Germany certainly could and should have contributed, the United Kingdom and the United States which slammed their doors shut to the persecuted Jews of Europe as the Nazis were rising to power, they certainly should have played a role. But instead, what passed for the international community at the time, decided to partition Palestine. And here I think we need to judge the Partition Resolution against the realities that obtained at the time time.
Two thirds of the population of Palestine was Arab. The Yishuv, the Jewish community in Palestine, constituted about one third of the total population and controlled even less of the land within Palestine. As a preeminent Palestinian historian Walid Khalidi has pointed out, the Partition Resolution in giving roughly 55% of Palestine to the Jewish community, and I think 41, 42% to the Arab community, to the Palestinians, did not preserve the position of each community, or even favor one community at the expense of the other. Rather, it thoroughly inverted and revolutionized the relationship between the two communities.
And as many have written, the Nakba was the inevitable consequence of partition given the nature of Zionism, given the territorial disposition, given the weakness of the Palestinian community whose leadership had been largely decimated during a major revolt at the end of the 1930s, given that the Arab states were still very much under French and British influence, the Nakba was inevitable, the inevitable product of the Partition Resolution. And one last point also about the UN’s Partition Resolution is, yes, formally, that is what the international community decided on the 29th of November, 1947. It’s not a resolution that could ever have gotten through the UN General Assembly today for a very simple reason. It was a very different general assembly.
Most African, most Asian states were not yet independent. Were the resolution to be placed before the international community today, and I find it telling that the minority opinion was led by India, Iran, and Yugoslavia, I think they would’ve represented the clear majority. So partition, given what we know about Zionism, given that it was entirely predictable what would happen, given the realities on the ground in Palestine was deeply unjust, and the idea that either the Palestinians or the Arab states could have accepted such a resolution is, I think, an illusion. That was in 1947. We saw what happened in ’48 and ’49. Palestinian society was essentially destroyed. Over 80%, I believe, of Palestinians residents in the territory that became the state of Israel were either expelled or fled and ultimately were ethnically cleansed because ethnic cleansing consists of two components. It’s not just forcing people into refuge or expelling them, it’s just as importantly preventing their return. And Benny Morris has written, I think, a article about Yosef Weitz and the transfer committees. There was a very detailed initiative to prevent the return and it consisted of raising hundreds of Palestinian villages to the ground, which was systematically implemented and so on. And so Palestinians became a stateless people.
Now, what is the most important reason that no Arab state was established in Palestine? Well, since the 1930s, the Zionist leadership and the Hashemite leadership of Jordan, as it’s been thoroughly researched and written about by the Israeli-British historian Avi Shlaim, essentially colluded to prevent the establishment of an independent Arab state in Palestine in the late 1940s. There’s much more here, but I think those are the key points I would make about 1948.
Lex Fridman
We may talk about Zionism, Britain, UN assemblies and all the things you mentioned. There’s a lot to dig into. So again, if we can keep it to just one statement moving forward, after Steven, if you want to go a little longer. Also, we should acknowledge the fact that the speaking speeds of people here are different. Steven speaks about 10 times faster than me. Steven, if you want to comment on 1948.
We may talk about Zionism, Britain, UN assemblies and all the things you mentioned. There’s a lot to dig into. So again, if we can keep it to just one statement moving forward, after Steven, if you want to go a little longer. Also, we should acknowledge the fact that the speaking speeds of people here are different. Steven speaks about 10 times faster than me. Steven, if you want to comment on 1948.
Steven Bonnell
Yeah. I think it’s interesting where people choose to start the history. I noticed a lot of people like to start at either ’47 or ’48 because it’s the first time where they can clearly point to a catastrophe that occurs on the Arab side, that they want to ascribe 100% of the blame to the newly emergent Israeli state to. But I feel like when you have this type of reading of history, it feels like the goal is to moralize everything first and then to pick and choose facts that support the statements of your initial moral statement afterwards. Whenever people are talking about ’48 or the establishment of the Arab state, I never hear about the fact that a civil war started in ’47. That was largely instigated because of the Arab rejectionism of the ’47 partition plan.
Yeah. I think it’s interesting where people choose to start the history. I noticed a lot of people like to start at either ’47 or ’48 because it’s the first time where they can clearly point to a catastrophe that occurs on the Arab side, that they want to ascribe 100% of the blame to the newly emergent Israeli state to. But I feel like when you have this type of reading of history, it feels like the goal is to moralize everything first and then to pick and choose facts that support the statements of your initial moral statement afterwards. Whenever people are talking about ’48 or the establishment of the Arab state, I never hear about the fact that a civil war started in ’47. That was largely instigated because of the Arab rejectionism of the ’47 partition plan.
I never hear about the fact that the majority of the land that was acquired happened by purchases from Jewish organizations of Palestinian Arabs of the Ottoman Empire before the mandatory period in 1920 even started. Funnily enough, king Abdullah of Jordan was quoted as saying, “The Arabs are as prodigal in selling their land as they are in weeping about it.” I never hear about the multiple times that Arabs rejected partition, rejected living with Jews, rejected any sort of state that would’ve even had any sort of Jewish exclusivity. It’s funny because it was brought up before that the partition plan was unfair, and that’s why the Arabs rejected it, as though they rejected it because it was unfair, because of the amount of land that Jews were given and not just due to the fact that Jews were given land at all, as though a 30% partition or a 25% partition would’ve been accepted when I don’t think that was the reality of the circumstances.
I feel like most of the other stuff has been said, but I noticed that whenever people talk about ’48 or the years preceding ’48, I think the worst thing that happens is there’s a cherry-picking of the facts where basically all of the blame is ascribed to this built-in idea of Zionism because of a handful of quotes or because of an ideology, we can say that transfer or population expulsion or basically the mandate of all of these Arabs being kicked off the land was always going to happen, when I think there’s a refusal sometimes as well to acknowledge that regardless of the ideas of some of the Zionist leaders, there is a political, social and military reality on the ground that they’re forced to contend with.
And unfortunately, the Arabs, because of their inability to engage in diplomacy and only to use tools of war to try to negotiate everything going on in mandatory Palestine, basically always gave the Jews a reason or an excuse to fight and acquire land through that way because of their refusal to negotiate on anything else, whether it was the partition plan in ’47, whether it was the Lausanne peace conference afterwards where Israel even offered to annex Gaza in ’51, where they offered to take in a hundred thousand refugees. Every single deal is just rejected out of hand because the Arabs don’t want a Jewish state anywhere in this region of the world.
Norman Finkelstein
I would like to engage Professor Morris. If you don’t mind, I’m not with the first name. It’s just not my-
I would like to engage Professor Morris. If you don’t mind, I’m not with the first name. It’s just not my-
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Norman Finkelstein
… way of relating.
… way of relating.
Benny Morris
You can just call me Morris. You don’t need the professor.
You can just call me Morris. You don’t need the professor.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. There’s a real problem here, and it’s been a problem I’ve had over many years of reading your work. Apart perhaps from, as grandchild, I suspect nobody knows your work better than I do. I’ve read it many times, not once, not twice, at least three times everything you’ve written. And the problem is, it’s a kind of quicksilver. It’s very hard to grasp a point and hold you to it. So we’re going to try here to see whether we can hold you to a point. And then you argue with me the point. I have no problem with that. Your name please.
Okay. There’s a real problem here, and it’s been a problem I’ve had over many years of reading your work. Apart perhaps from, as grandchild, I suspect nobody knows your work better than I do. I’ve read it many times, not once, not twice, at least three times everything you’ve written. And the problem is, it’s a kind of quicksilver. It’s very hard to grasp a point and hold you to it. So we’re going to try here to see whether we can hold you to a point. And then you argue with me the point. I have no problem with that. Your name please.
Steven Bonnell
Steven Bonnell.
Steven Bonnell.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. Mr. Bonnell referred to cherry-picking and handful of quotes. Now, it’s true that when you wrote your first book on the Palestinian refugee question, you only had a few lines on this issue of transfer.
Okay. Mr. Bonnell referred to cherry-picking and handful of quotes. Now, it’s true that when you wrote your first book on the Palestinian refugee question, you only had a few lines on this issue of transfer.
Benny Morris
Four pages.
Four pages.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah. In the first book?
Yeah. In the first book?
Benny Morris
In the first book. Four pages.
In the first book. Four pages.
Norman Finkelstein
Maybe four. I’m not going to quarrel. My memory is not clear. We’re talking about 40 years ago. I read it, I read it, but then I read other things by you. Okay. And you were taken to task, if my memory is correct, that you hadn’t adequately documented the claims of transfer. Allow me to finish. And I thought that was a reasonable challenge because it was an unusual claim for a mainstream Israeli historian to say, as you did not-
Maybe four. I’m not going to quarrel. My memory is not clear. We’re talking about 40 years ago. I read it, I read it, but then I read other things by you. Okay. And you were taken to task, if my memory is correct, that you hadn’t adequately documented the claims of transfer. Allow me to finish. And I thought that was a reasonable challenge because it was an unusual claim for a mainstream Israeli historian to say, as you did not-
Norman Finkelstein
Mainstream Israeli historian to say, as you did in that first book, that from the very beginning, transfer figured prominently in Zionist thinking that was an unusual, if you read Anita Shapira, you read Shabtai Teveth that was an unusual acknowledgement by you. And then I found it very impressive that in that revised version of your first book, you devoted 25 pages to copiously documenting the salience of transfer in Zionist thinking. And in fact, you used a very provocative and resonant phrase.
Mainstream Israeli historian to say, as you did in that first book, that from the very beginning, transfer figured prominently in Zionist thinking that was an unusual, if you read Anita Shapira, you read Shabtai Teveth that was an unusual acknowledgement by you. And then I found it very impressive that in that revised version of your first book, you devoted 25 pages to copiously documenting the salience of transfer in Zionist thinking. And in fact, you used a very provocative and resonant phrase.
You said that transfer was inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism. We’re not talking about circumstantial factors, a war, Arab hostility. You said it’s inevitable and inbuilt into Zionism. Now, as I said, so we won’t be accused of cherry picking. Those were 25 very densely argued pages. And then in an interview, and I could cite several quotes, but I’ll choose one, you said, “Removing a population was needed.” Let’s look at the words. “Without a population expulsion, a Jewish state would not have been established.” Now you are the one… Again, I was very surprised when I read your book here. I’m referring to “Righteous Victims.” I was very surprised when I came to that page 37, where you wrote that territorial displacement and dispossession was the chief motor of Arab resistance to Zionism. Territorial displacement and dispossession were the chief motor of Arab resistance to Zionism.
So you then went on to say, because the Arab population rationally feared territorial displacement and dispossession, it of course opposed Zionism. That’s as normal as Native Americans opposing the Euro-American manifest destiny in the history of our own country because they understood it would be at their expense. It was inbuilt and inevitable.
And so now for you to come along and say that it all happened just because of the war, that otherwise the Zionists made all these plans for a happy minority to live there, that simply does not gel. It does not cohere. It is not reconcilable with what you yourself have written. It was inevitable and inbuilt.
Now, in other situations, you’ve said that’s true with, I think it was a greater good to establish a Jewish state at the expense of the indigenous population. That’s another kind of argument that was Theodore Roosevelt’s argument in our own country. He said, we don’t want the whole of North America to remain a squalid refuge for these wigwams and teepees. We have to get rid of them and make this a great country. But he didn’t deny that it was inbuilt and inevitable.
Benny Morris
I think You’ve made your point there. First, I’ll take up something that Mouin said. He said that the Nakba was inevitable=
I think You’ve made your point there. First, I’ll take up something that Mouin said. He said that the Nakba was inevitable=
Mouin Rabbani
As have you.
As have you.
Benny Morris
… and predictable. No, no, no, I’ve never said that. It was inevitable and predictable only because the Arabs assaulted the Jewish community and state in 1947/48. Had there been no assault, there probably wouldn’t have been a refugee problem. There’s no reason for a refugee problem to have occurred, expulsions to have occurred, a massive dispossession to occur. These occurred as a result of war.
… and predictable. No, no, no, I’ve never said that. It was inevitable and predictable only because the Arabs assaulted the Jewish community and state in 1947/48. Had there been no assault, there probably wouldn’t have been a refugee problem. There’s no reason for a refugee problem to have occurred, expulsions to have occurred, a massive dispossession to occur. These occurred as a result of war.
Now, Norman has said that, I said that transfer was inbuilt into Zionism in one way or another. And this is certainly true in order to buy land, the Jews bought tracts of land on which some Arabs sometimes lived. Sometimes they bought tracts of land on which there weren’t Arab villages, but sometimes they bought land on which there were Arabs.
And according to Ottoman law, and the British, at least in the initial years of the British mandate, the law said that the people who bought the land could do what they liked with the people who didn’t own the land, who were basically squatting on the land, which is the Arab tenant farmers, which is we’re talking about a very small number actually of Arabs who were displaced as a result of land purchases in the Ottoman period or the mandate period.
But there was dispossession in one way. They didn’t possess the land. They didn’t own it, but they were removed from the land. And this did happen in Zionism. And there’s, if you like, an inevitability in Zionist ideology of buying tracts of land and starting to work it yourself and settle it with your own people and so on. That made sense.
But what we’re really talking about is what happened in 47/48. And in 47/48, the Arabs started a war. And actually people pay for their mistakes. And the Palestinians have never actually agreed to pay for their mistakes. They make mistakes, they attack, they suffer as a result.
And we see something similar going on today in the Gaza Strip. They do something terrible. They kill 1,200 Jews. They abduct 250 women and children and babies and old people and whatever. And then they start screaming, please save us from what we did because the Jews are counterattacking. And this is what happened then. And this is what’s happening now. There’s something fairly similar in the situation here.
Expulsion, and this is important, Norman, you should pay attention to this. You didn’t raise that. Expulsion transfer whenever policy of the Zionist movement before 47, it doesn’t exist in Zionist platforms of the various political parties, of the Zionist organization, of the Israeli state, of the Jewish agency. Nobody would’ve actually made it into policy because it was always a large minority. If there were people who wanted it, always a large minority of Jewish politicians and leaders would’ve said, no, this is immoral. We cannot start a state on the basis of an expulsion.
So it was never adopted and actually was never adopted as policy even in 48, even though Ben-Gurion wanted as few Arabs in the course of the war staying in the Jewish state after they attacked it. He didn’t want disloyal citizens staying there because they wouldn’t have been loyal citizens. But this made sense in the war itself. But the movement itself and its political parties never accepted it.
It’s true that in 1937, when the British, as part of the proposal by the Peel Commission to divide the country into two states, one Arab, one Jewish, which the Arabs of course rejected, Peel also recommended most of the Arabs in the Jewish state should be transferred because otherwise, if they stayed and were disloyal to the emergent Jewish state, this would cause endless disturbances, warfare, killing, and so on.
So Ben-Gurion and Weizmann latched onto this proposal by the most famous democracy in the world, the British democracy, when they proposed the idea of transfer side by side with the idea of partition because it made sense. And they said, well, if the British say so, we should also advocate it. But they never actually tried to pass it as Zionist policy, and they fairly quickly stopped even talking about transfer after 1938.
Lex Fridman
So just to clarify, what you’re saying is that 47 was an offensive war, not a defensive war-
So just to clarify, what you’re saying is that 47 was an offensive war, not a defensive war-
Benny Morris
By the Arabs. Yes.
By the Arabs. Yes.
Lex Fridman
… by the Arabs.
… by the Arabs.
Benny Morris
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
And you’re also saying that there was never a top-down policy of expulsion.
And you’re also saying that there was never a top-down policy of expulsion.
Benny Morris
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Just to clarify the point.
Just to clarify the point.
Mouin Rabbani
If I understood you correctly, you’re making the claim that transfer expulsion and so on was in fact a very localized phenomenon-
If I understood you correctly, you’re making the claim that transfer expulsion and so on was in fact a very localized phenomenon-
Benny Morris
Before 48.
Before 48.
Mouin Rabbani
… resulting from individual land purchases. If I understand you correctly, you’re also making the claim that the idea that a Jewish state requires a removal or overwhelming reduction of the non-Jewish population was-
… resulting from individual land purchases. If I understand you correctly, you’re also making the claim that the idea that a Jewish state requires a removal or overwhelming reduction of the non-Jewish population was-
Benny Morris
If the Arabs are attacking you. Yes.
If the Arabs are attacking you. Yes.
Mouin Rabbani
… But let’s say prior to 1947, it would be your claim that the idea that a significant reduction or wholesale removal of the Arab population was not part of Zionist thinking. Well, I think there’s two problems with that. I think what you’re saying about localized disputes is correct, but I also think that there is a whole literature that demonstrates that transfer was envisioned by Zionist leaders on a much broader skill than simply individual land purchases. In other words, it went way beyond, we need to remove these tenants so that we can farm this land. The idea was we can’t have a state where all these Arabs remain and we have to get rid of them.
… But let’s say prior to 1947, it would be your claim that the idea that a significant reduction or wholesale removal of the Arab population was not part of Zionist thinking. Well, I think there’s two problems with that. I think what you’re saying about localized disputes is correct, but I also think that there is a whole literature that demonstrates that transfer was envisioned by Zionist leaders on a much broader skill than simply individual land purchases. In other words, it went way beyond, we need to remove these tenants so that we can farm this land. The idea was we can’t have a state where all these Arabs remain and we have to get rid of them.
And the second, I think, impediment to that view is that long before the UN General Assembly convened to address a question of Palestine, Palestinian and Arab and other leaders as well had been warning ad infinitum that the purpose of the Zionist movement is not just to establish a Jewish state, but to establish an exclusivist Jewish state. And that transfer forced displacement was fundamental to that project. And just responding to…. Sorry, was it-
Steven Bonnell
Yeah, Steven.
Yeah, Steven.
Mouin Rabbani
… Bonnell or Donnel?
… Bonnell or Donnel?
Steven Bonnell
Bonnell, yeah.
Bonnell, yeah.
Mouin Rabbani
With a B?
With a B?
Steven Bonnell
Yeah.
Yeah.
Mouin Rabbani
Yeah. You made the point that the problem here is that people don’t recognize is that the first and last result for the Arabs is always war. I think there’s a problem with that. I think you might do well to recall the 1936 general strike conducted by Palestinians at the beginning of the revolt, which at the time was the longest recorded general strike in history.
Yeah. You made the point that the problem here is that people don’t recognize is that the first and last result for the Arabs is always war. I think there’s a problem with that. I think you might do well to recall the 1936 general strike conducted by Palestinians at the beginning of the revolt, which at the time was the longest recorded general strike in history.
You may want to consult the book published last year by Lori Allen, “A History of False Hope”, which discusses in great detail the consistent engagement by Palestinians, their leaders, their elites, their diplomats, and so on with all these international committees.
If we look at today, the Palestinians are once again going to the International Court of Justice. They’re consistently trying to persuade the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to do his job. They have launched widespread boycott campaigns. So of course the Palestinians have engaged in military resistance. But I think the suggestion that this has always been their first and last resort and that they have somehow spurned civic action, spurned diplomacy, I think really has no basis in reality.
Steven Bonnell
I’ll respond to that. And then a question for Norm to take into account. I think when he answers Benny, because I am curious, obviously I have fresher eyes on this and I’m a newcomer to this arena versus the three of you guys for sure. A claim that gets brought up a lot has to do with the inevitability of transfer and Zionism or the idea that as soon as the Jews envisioned a state in Palestine, they knew that it would involve some mass transfer population, perhaps a mass expulsion. I’m sure we’ll talk about Plan Dalet or Plan D at some point.
I’ll respond to that. And then a question for Norm to take into account. I think when he answers Benny, because I am curious, obviously I have fresher eyes on this and I’m a newcomer to this arena versus the three of you guys for sure. A claim that gets brought up a lot has to do with the inevitability of transfer and Zionism or the idea that as soon as the Jews envisioned a state in Palestine, they knew that it would involve some mass transfer population, perhaps a mass expulsion. I’m sure we’ll talk about Plan Dalet or Plan D at some point.
The issue that I run into is while you can find quotes from leaders, while you can find maybe desires expressed in diaries, I feel like it’s hard to truly ever know if there would’ve been mass transfer in the face of Arab peace, because I feel like every time there was a huge deal on the table that would’ve had a sizable Jewish and Arab population living together, the Arabs would reject it out of hand.
So for instance, when we say that transfer was inevitable, when we say that Zionists would’ve never accepted a sizable Arab population, how do you explain the acceptance of the 47 partition plan that would’ve had a huge Arab population living in the Jewish state? Is your contention that after the acceptance of that, after the establishment of that state, that Jews would’ve slowly started to expel all of these Arab citizens from their country?
Or how do you explain that in Lusanne a couple years later that Israel was willing to formally annex the Gaza Strip and make-
Mouin Rabbani
Of course it was.
Of course it was.
Steven Bonnell
… 200,000 so people, those citizens, but I’m just curious, how do we get this idea of Zionism always means mass transfer when there were times, at least early on in the history of Israel and a little bit before it, where Israel would’ve accepted a state that would’ve had a massive Arab population in it. Is your idea that they would’ve just slowly expelled them afterwards or?
… 200,000 so people, those citizens, but I’m just curious, how do we get this idea of Zionism always means mass transfer when there were times, at least early on in the history of Israel and a little bit before it, where Israel would’ve accepted a state that would’ve had a massive Arab population in it. Is your idea that they would’ve just slowly expelled them afterwards or?
Mouin Rabbani
Is that question to me or Norm?
Is that question to me or Norm?
Steven Bonnell
To either one. I’m curious for the incorporation of the answer. Yeah.
To either one. I’m curious for the incorporation of the answer. Yeah.
Norman Finkelstein
There is some misunderstandings here. So let’s try to clarify that. Number one, it was the old historians who would point to the fact and Professor Morris’s terminology, the old historians, what he called not real historians, he called them chroniclers, not real historians. It was the old Israeli historians who denied the centrality of transfer in Zionist thinking. It was then Professor Morris who contrary to Israel’s historian establishment, who said, now you remind me it’s four pages, but it came at the end of the book. It was-
There is some misunderstandings here. So let’s try to clarify that. Number one, it was the old historians who would point to the fact and Professor Morris’s terminology, the old historians, what he called not real historians, he called them chroniclers, not real historians. It was the old Israeli historians who denied the centrality of transfer in Zionist thinking. It was then Professor Morris who contrary to Israel’s historian establishment, who said, now you remind me it’s four pages, but it came at the end of the book. It was-
Benny Morris
No, no, it’s at the beginning of the book.
No, no, it’s at the beginning of the book.
Norman Finkelstein
… Transfer.
… Transfer.
Benny Morris
Yeah, transfer is dealt with in four pages at the beginning of my first book on the Palestinian refugee problem.
Yeah, transfer is dealt with in four pages at the beginning of my first book on the Palestinian refugee problem.
Norman Finkelstein
It’s a fault of my memory, but the point still stands, it was Professor Morris who introduced this idea in what you might call a big way.
It’s a fault of my memory, but the point still stands, it was Professor Morris who introduced this idea in what you might call a big way.
Benny Morris
Yeah, but I didn’t say it was the central to the Zionist experience. You’re saying centrality. I never said it was central. I said it was there. The idea.
Yeah, but I didn’t say it was the central to the Zionist experience. You’re saying centrality. I never said it was central. I said it was there. The idea.
Lex Fridman
By the way, it’s okay to respond back and forth. This is great. And also just a quick question, if I may. You’re using quotes from Benny, from Professor Morris. It’s also okay to say those quotes do not reflect the full context.
By the way, it’s okay to respond back and forth. This is great. And also just a quick question, if I may. You’re using quotes from Benny, from Professor Morris. It’s also okay to say those quotes do not reflect the full context.
Norman Finkelstein
That would be fine.
That would be fine.
Lex Fridman
So if we go back to quotes we’ve said in the past, and you’ve both here have written, the three of you have written on this topic a lot is we should be careful and just admit like-
So if we go back to quotes we’ve said in the past, and you’ve both here have written, the three of you have written on this topic a lot is we should be careful and just admit like-
Steven Bonnell
Real quick just to be clear that the contention is that Norm is quoting apart and saying that this was the entire reason for this, whereas Benny’s saying it’s a part of that.
Real quick just to be clear that the contention is that Norm is quoting apart and saying that this was the entire reason for this, whereas Benny’s saying it’s a part of that.
Norman Finkelstein
I’m not quoting apart, I’m quoting 25 pages where Professor Morris was at great pains to document the claim that appeared in those early four pages of his book. Now you say it never became part of the official Zionist platform.
I’m not quoting apart, I’m quoting 25 pages where Professor Morris was at great pains to document the claim that appeared in those early four pages of his book. Now you say it never became part of the official Zionist platform.
Benny Morris
It never became part of policy.
It never became part of policy.
Norman Finkelstein
Fine.
Fine.
Benny Morris
Not to say, but it wasn’t policy.
Not to say, but it wasn’t policy.
Norman Finkelstein
We’re also asked, well, this is true. Why did that happen? Why did that happen? It’s because it’s a very simple fact which everybody understands. Ideology doesn’t operate in a vacuum. There are real world practical problems. You can’t just take an ideology and superimpose it on a political reality and turn it into effect.
We’re also asked, well, this is true. Why did that happen? Why did that happen? It’s because it’s a very simple fact which everybody understands. Ideology doesn’t operate in a vacuum. There are real world practical problems. You can’t just take an ideology and superimpose it on a political reality and turn it into effect.
It was the British mandate. There was significant Arab resistance to Zionism, and that resistance was based on the fact, as you said, the fear of territorial displacement and dispossession. So you couldn’t very well expect the Zionist movement to come out in neon lights and announce, hey, we’re going to be expelling you the first chance we get. That’s not realistic.
Lex Fridman
Norm.
Norm.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay.
Okay.
Benny Morris
Let me respond. Look, you’ve said it a number of times that the Arabs from fairly early on in the conflict from the 1890s or the early 1900s said the Jews intend to expel us. This doesn’t mean that it’s true. It means that some Arabs said this, maybe believing it was true, maybe using it as a political instrument to gain support to mobilize Arabs against the Zionist experiment.
Let me respond. Look, you’ve said it a number of times that the Arabs from fairly early on in the conflict from the 1890s or the early 1900s said the Jews intend to expel us. This doesn’t mean that it’s true. It means that some Arabs said this, maybe believing it was true, maybe using it as a political instrument to gain support to mobilize Arabs against the Zionist experiment.
But the fact is transfer did not occur before 1947, and Arabs later said, and since then have said that the Jews want to build a third temple on the Temple Mount as if that’s what really the mainstream of Zionism has always wanted and always strived for. But this is nonsense. It’s something that Husseini used to use as a way to mobilize masses for the cause, using religion as the way to get them to join him. The fact that Arabs said that the Zionists want to dispossess us doesn’t mean it’s true. It just means that there’s some Arabs thought that maybe said it sincerely and maybe insincerely.
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris.
Professor Morris.
Benny Morris
Later became a self-fulfilling prophecy. This is true because Arabs attacked the Jews.
Later became a self-fulfilling prophecy. This is true because Arabs attacked the Jews.
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris, I read through your stuff. Even yesterday I was looking through “Righteous Victims.”
Professor Morris, I read through your stuff. Even yesterday I was looking through “Righteous Victims.”
Benny Morris
You should read other things. You’re wasting your time.
You should read other things. You’re wasting your time.
Norman Finkelstein
No, no, actually no. I do read other things, but I don’t consider it a waste of time to read you. Not at all. You say that this wasn’t inherent in Zionism. Now, would you agree that David Ben-Gurion was a Zionist?
No, no, actually no. I do read other things, but I don’t consider it a waste of time to read you. Not at all. You say that this wasn’t inherent in Zionism. Now, would you agree that David Ben-Gurion was a Zionist?
Benny Morris
A major Zionist leader?
A major Zionist leader?
Norman Finkelstein
Right. Would you agree Chaim Weizmann was a Zionist?
Right. Would you agree Chaim Weizmann was a Zionist?
Benny Morris
Yeah.
Yeah.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. I believe they were. I believe they took their ideology seriously. It was the first generation. Just like with the Bolsheviks, the first generation was committed to an idea. By the 1930s, it was just pure geopolitique. The ideology went out the window. The first generation, I have no doubt about their convictions. Okay. They were Zionists. Transfer was inevitable and inbuilt in Zionism.
Okay. I believe they were. I believe they took their ideology seriously. It was the first generation. Just like with the Bolsheviks, the first generation was committed to an idea. By the 1930s, it was just pure geopolitique. The ideology went out the window. The first generation, I have no doubt about their convictions. Okay. They were Zionists. Transfer was inevitable and inbuilt in Zionism.
Benny Morris
You keep repeating the same things.
You keep repeating the same things.
Norman Finkelstein
Because as I said, Mr. Morris, I have a problem reconciling what you’re saying. It either was incidental or it was deeply entrenched. Here I read it’s deeply entrenched, two very resonant words, inevitable and inbuilt.
Because as I said, Mr. Morris, I have a problem reconciling what you’re saying. It either was incidental or it was deeply entrenched. Here I read it’s deeply entrenched, two very resonant words, inevitable and inbuilt.
Benny Morris
Deeply entrenched. I never wrote it.
Deeply entrenched. I never wrote it.
Norman Finkelstein
Well, I’m not sure.
Well, I’m not sure.
Benny Morris
It’s something you just invented.
It’s something you just invented.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay.
Okay.
Benny Morris
But it was there.
But it was there.
Norman Finkelstein
Inevitable and inbuilt. Fine, fine.
Inevitable and inbuilt. Fine, fine.
Benny Morris
Let me concede something. The idea of transfer was there. Israel Zangwill, a British Zionist talked about it early on in the century. Even Herzl in some way talked about transferring population.
Let me concede something. The idea of transfer was there. Israel Zangwill, a British Zionist talked about it early on in the century. Even Herzl in some way talked about transferring population.
Norman Finkelstein
According to your 25 pages everybody talked about.
According to your 25 pages everybody talked about.
Lex Fridman
we keep bringing up this line from the 25 pages and the four pages. We’re lucky to have Benny in front of us right now. We don’t need to go to the quotes. We can legitimately ask, how central is expulsion to Zionism in its early version of Zionism and whatever Zionism is today, and how much power influence does Zionism and ideology have in Israel and the influence, the philosophy, the ideology of Zionism have on Israel today?
we keep bringing up this line from the 25 pages and the four pages. We’re lucky to have Benny in front of us right now. We don’t need to go to the quotes. We can legitimately ask, how central is expulsion to Zionism in its early version of Zionism and whatever Zionism is today, and how much power influence does Zionism and ideology have in Israel and the influence, the philosophy, the ideology of Zionism have on Israel today?
Benny Morris
The Zionist movement up to 1948, Zionist ideology was central to the whole Zionist experience, the whole enterprise up to 1948. And I think Zionist ideology was also important in the first decades of Israel’s existence. Slowly, the hold of Zionism, if you like, like Bolshevism held the Soviet Union gradually faded, and a lot of Israelis today think in terms of individual success and then the capitalism and all sorts of things, which had nothing to do with Zionism, but Zionism was very important.
The Zionist movement up to 1948, Zionist ideology was central to the whole Zionist experience, the whole enterprise up to 1948. And I think Zionist ideology was also important in the first decades of Israel’s existence. Slowly, the hold of Zionism, if you like, like Bolshevism held the Soviet Union gradually faded, and a lot of Israelis today think in terms of individual success and then the capitalism and all sorts of things, which had nothing to do with Zionism, but Zionism was very important.
But what I’m saying is that the idea of transfer wasn’t the core of Zionism. The idea of Zionism was to save the Jews who had been vastly persecuted in Eastern Europe, and incidentally in the Arab world, the Muslim world for centuries, and eventually ending up with the Holocaust. The idea of Zionism was to save the Jewish people by establishing a state or re-establishing a Jewish state on the ancient Jewish homeland, which is something that Arabs today even deny that there were Jews in Palestine or the land of Israel 2000 years ago.
Arafat famously said, “What Temple was there on Temple Mount? Maybe it was in Nablus.” Which of course is nonsense. But they had a strong connection for thousands of years to the land to which they wanted to return and return there. They found that on the land lived hundreds of thousands of Arabs, and the question was how to accommodate the vision of a Jewish state in Palestine alongside the existence of these Arab masses living on who were indigenous, in fact, to the land by that stage.
And the idea of partition because they couldn’t live together because the Arabs didn’t want to live together with the Jews. And I think the Jews also didn’t want to live together in one state with Arabs in general. The idea of partition was the thing which the Zionists accepted, okay, we can only get a small part of Palestine. The Arabs will get in 37. Most of Palestine in 1947 the ratios were changed, but we can live side by side with each other in a partitioned Palestine. And this was the essence of it.
The idea of transfer was there, but it was never adopted as policy. But in 1947/48, the Arabs attacked trying to destroy essentially the Zionist enterprise and the emerging Jewish state. And the reaction was transfer in some way, not as policy, but this is what happened on the battlefield. And this is also what Ben-Gurion at some point began to want as well.
Mouin Rabbani
One of the first books on this issue I read when I was still in high school because my late father had it, was “The Diaries of Theodor Herzl.” And I think Theodor Herzl, of course, was the founder of the contemporary Zionist movement. And I think if you read that, it’s very clear for Herzl the model upon which the Zionist movement would proceed. His model was Cecil Rhodes.
One of the first books on this issue I read when I was still in high school because my late father had it, was “The Diaries of Theodor Herzl.” And I think Theodor Herzl, of course, was the founder of the contemporary Zionist movement. And I think if you read that, it’s very clear for Herzl the model upon which the Zionist movement would proceed. His model was Cecil Rhodes.
I think Rhodes, from what I recall, correct me if I’m wrong, has quite a prominent place in Herzl’s diaries. I think Herzl was also corresponding with him and seeking his support. Cecil Rhodes, of course, was the British colonialist after whom the former white minority regime in Rhodesia was named. And Herzl also says explicitly in his diaries, that it is essential to remove the existing population from Palestine.
Benny Morris
Can I respond to this-
Can I respond to this-
Mouin Rabbani
In a moment, please. He says, we shall have to spirit the penniless population across the borders and procure employment for them elsewhere or something. And Israel Zangwill who you mentioned, a land without a people for a people without a land, they knew then well it wasn’t a land without a people. I’ll continue, but please go ahead.
In a moment, please. He says, we shall have to spirit the penniless population across the borders and procure employment for them elsewhere or something. And Israel Zangwill who you mentioned, a land without a people for a people without a land, they knew then well it wasn’t a land without a people. I’ll continue, but please go ahead.
Benny Morris
Just to this, there is one small diary entry in Herzl’s vast-
Just to this, there is one small diary entry in Herzl’s vast-
Mouin Rabbani
It’s five volumes.
It’s five volumes.
Benny Morris
… Yeah, five volumes. There’s one paragraph which actually mentions the idea of transfer. There are people who think that Herzl was actually pointing to South America when he was talking about that the Jews were going to move to Argentina, and then they would try and buy out or buy off or spirit the penniless natives to make way for Jewish settlement. Maybe he wasn’t even talking about the Arabs in that particular passage. That’s the argument of some people. Maybe he was.
… Yeah, five volumes. There’s one paragraph which actually mentions the idea of transfer. There are people who think that Herzl was actually pointing to South America when he was talking about that the Jews were going to move to Argentina, and then they would try and buy out or buy off or spirit the penniless natives to make way for Jewish settlement. Maybe he wasn’t even talking about the Arabs in that particular passage. That’s the argument of some people. Maybe he was.
But the point is it has only a 1% of the diary, which is devoted to this subject. It’s not a central idea in Herzl’s thinking. What Herzl wanted, and this is what’s important, not Rhodes, I don’t think he was the model. Herzl wanted to create a liberal democratic western state in Palestine for the Jews. That was the idea. Not some imperial enterprise serving some imperial master, which is what Rhodes was about.
But to have a Jewish state, which was modeled on the western democracies in Palestine, and this incidentally was more or less what Weizmann and Ben-Gurion wanted. Ben-Gurion was more of a socialist. Weizmann was more of a liberal westerner, but they wanted to establish a social democratic or liberal state in Palestine.
And they both envisioned through most of the years of their activity that there would be an Arab minority in that Jewish state. It’s true that Ben-Gurion strived to have as small as possible an Arab minority in the Jewish state because he knew that if you want a Jewish majority state, that would be necessary, but it’s not something which they were willing to translate into actual policy.
Lex Fridman
Just a quick pause to mention that for people who are not familiar, Theodor Herzl we’re talking about over a century ago, and everything we’ve been talking about has been mostly 1948 and before.
Just a quick pause to mention that for people who are not familiar, Theodor Herzl we’re talking about over a century ago, and everything we’ve been talking about has been mostly 1948 and before.
Mouin Rabbani
Yes. Just one clarification on Herzl’s diaries. I mean, the other thing that I recall from those diaries is he was very preoccupied with, in fact, getting great power patronage, seeing Palestine, the Jewish state in Palestine, I think his words, an outpost of civilization against barbarism. In other words, very much seeing his project as a proxy for Western imperialism-
Yes. Just one clarification on Herzl’s diaries. I mean, the other thing that I recall from those diaries is he was very preoccupied with, in fact, getting great power patronage, seeing Palestine, the Jewish state in Palestine, I think his words, an outpost of civilization against barbarism. In other words, very much seeing his project as a proxy for Western imperialism-
Benny Morris
No, no, I don’t think that’s the right word.
No, no, I don’t think that’s the right word.
Mouin Rabbani
… in the Middle East.
… in the Middle East.
Benny Morris
Not proxy. He wanted to establish a Jewish state which would be independent. To get that he hoped that he would be able to garner support from major imperial powers, but it wasn’t-
Not proxy. He wanted to establish a Jewish state which would be independent. To get that he hoped that he would be able to garner support from major imperial powers, but it wasn’t-
Mouin Rabbani
Including the Ottoman Sultan-
Including the Ottoman Sultan-
Benny Morris
Yes, yes, exactly.
Yes, yes, exactly.
Partition
Mouin Rabbani
… who he tried to cultivate. I just want to respond to a point you made earlier, which was that people expressed the rejection of the partition resolution on the grounds that it gave the majority of Palestine to the Jewish community, which formed only a third. Whereas in fact, if I understood you correctly, you’re saying the Palestinians and the Arabs would have rejected any partition resolution.
… who he tried to cultivate. I just want to respond to a point you made earlier, which was that people expressed the rejection of the partition resolution on the grounds that it gave the majority of Palestine to the Jewish community, which formed only a third. Whereas in fact, if I understood you correctly, you’re saying the Palestinians and the Arabs would have rejected any partition resolution.
Steven Bonnell
Yeah, a couple of things that one, they would’ve rejected any. Two, a lot of that land given was in the Negev. It was pretty terrible land at the time. And then three, the land that would’ve been partitioned to Jews I think would’ve been, I think I saw it was like 500,000… It would’ve been 500,000 Jews, 400,000 Arabs, and I think like 80,000 Bedouins would’ve been there. So the state would’ve been divided pretty close to them.
Yeah, a couple of things that one, they would’ve rejected any. Two, a lot of that land given was in the Negev. It was pretty terrible land at the time. And then three, the land that would’ve been partitioned to Jews I think would’ve been, I think I saw it was like 500,000… It would’ve been 500,000 Jews, 400,000 Arabs, and I think like 80,000 Bedouins would’ve been there. So the state would’ve been divided pretty close to them.
Mouin Rabbani
I think you raise a valid point because I think the Palestinians did reject the partition of their homeland in principle. And I think the fact that the United Nations General Assembly then awarded the majority of their homeland to the Zionist movement only added in salt to injury. I mean, one doesn’t have to sympathize with the Palestinians to recognize that they have now been a stateless people for 75 years.
I think you raise a valid point because I think the Palestinians did reject the partition of their homeland in principle. And I think the fact that the United Nations General Assembly then awarded the majority of their homeland to the Zionist movement only added in salt to injury. I mean, one doesn’t have to sympathize with the Palestinians to recognize that they have now been a stateless people for 75 years.
Can you name any country yours, for example, or yours, that would be prepared to give 55%, 25%, 10% of your country to the Palestinians? Of course not. And so the issue was not the existence of Jews in Palestine. They had been there for centuries, and of course they had ties to Palestine and particularly to Jerusalem and other places going back centuries if not millennia.
But the idea of establishing an exclusively Jewish state at the expense of those who were already living there, I think it was right to reject that. And I don’t think we can look back now 75 years later and say, well, you should have accepted losing 55% of your homeland because you ended up losing 78% of it, and the remaining 22% was occupied in 1967. That’s not how things work.
And I can imagine an American rejecting giving 10% of the United States to the Palestinians, and if that rejection leads to war and you lose half your country, I doubt that 50 years from now you’re going to say, well, maybe I should have accepted that.
Steven Bonnell
Sure. So I like this answer more than what I usually feel like I’m hearing when it comes to the Palestinian rejection of the 47 partition plan. Sometimes I feel like a weird switch happens to where the Arabs in the area are actually presented as entirely pragmatic people who are simply doing a calculation and saying like, well, we’re losing 55% of our land. Jews are only maybe one third of the people here, and we’ve got 45. And no, the math doesn’t work, basically. But it wasn’t a math problem. I think, like you said-
Sure. So I like this answer more than what I usually feel like I’m hearing when it comes to the Palestinian rejection of the 47 partition plan. Sometimes I feel like a weird switch happens to where the Arabs in the area are actually presented as entirely pragmatic people who are simply doing a calculation and saying like, well, we’re losing 55% of our land. Jews are only maybe one third of the people here, and we’ve got 45. And no, the math doesn’t work, basically. But it wasn’t a math problem. I think, like you said-
Mouin Rabbani
It was a matter of principle.
It was a matter of principle.
Steven Bonnell
… it was an ideology problem.
… it was an ideology problem.
Mouin Rabbani
No, it was a matter of principle.
No, it was a matter of principle.
Steven Bonnell
Yeah. Ideologically driven that they as a people have a right to or are entitled to this land that they’ve never actually had an independent state on, that they’ve never had even a guarantee of an independent state on, that they’ve never actually ruled a government on.
Yeah. Ideologically driven that they as a people have a right to or are entitled to this land that they’ve never actually had an independent state on, that they’ve never had even a guarantee of an independent state on, that they’ve never actually ruled a government on.
Mouin Rabbani
That last point is actually not correct because for all its injustice, the mandate system recognized Palestine as a class a mandate, which provisionally recognized the independence of that territory.
That last point is actually not correct because for all its injustice, the mandate system recognized Palestine as a class a mandate, which provisionally recognized the independence of that territory.
Steven Bonnell
Of what would emerge from that territory, but not of the Palestinians.
Of what would emerge from that territory, but not of the Palestinians.
Mouin Rabbani
It was provisionally recognized.
It was provisionally recognized.
Steven Bonnell
But the territory itself was, but not of the Palestinian people to have a right or guarantee to a government that would emerge from it.
But the territory itself was, but not of the Palestinian people to have a right or guarantee to a government that would emerge from it.
Mouin Rabbani
But it was the British mandate of Palestine, not the British mandate of Israel.
But it was the British mandate of Palestine, not the British mandate of Israel.
Benny Morris
The word exclusive, which you keep using is nonsense. The state, which Ben-Gurion envisioned would be a Jewish majority state as they accepted the 1947 partition resolution, as Steven said, that included 400,000 plus Arabs in a state which would have 500,000 Jews. So the idea of exclusivity wasn’t anywhere in the air at all among the Zionist leaders-
The word exclusive, which you keep using is nonsense. The state, which Ben-Gurion envisioned would be a Jewish majority state as they accepted the 1947 partition resolution, as Steven said, that included 400,000 plus Arabs in a state which would have 500,000 Jews. So the idea of exclusivity wasn’t anywhere in the air at all among the Zionist leaders-
Mouin Rabbani
I think it was there.
I think it was there.
Benny Morris
… in 4748, they wanted a Jewish majority state, but were willing to accept a state which had 40% Arabs. That’s one point. The second thing is that Palestinians may have regarded the land of Palestine as their homeland, but so did the Jews. It was the homeland of the Jews as well. The problem was the Arabs were unable and remain to this day, unable to recognize that for the Jews, that is their…
… in 4748, they wanted a Jewish majority state, but were willing to accept a state which had 40% Arabs. That’s one point. The second thing is that Palestinians may have regarded the land of Palestine as their homeland, but so did the Jews. It was the homeland of the Jews as well. The problem was the Arabs were unable and remain to this day, unable to recognize that for the Jews, that is their…
Benny Morris
… today, unable to recognize that for the Jews, that is their homeland as well. And the problem then is how do you share this homeland, either with one binational state or partitioned into two states? The problem is that the Arabs have always rejected both of these ideas. The homeland belongs to the Jews, as Jews feel, as much as it does, if not more, than for the Arabs.
… today, unable to recognize that for the Jews, that is their homeland as well. And the problem then is how do you share this homeland, either with one binational state or partitioned into two states? The problem is that the Arabs have always rejected both of these ideas. The homeland belongs to the Jews, as Jews feel, as much as it does, if not more, than for the Arabs.
Mouin Rabbani
I think I would say Zionists, not Jews.
I think I would say Zionists, not Jews.
Benny Morris
I would say for the Jews. It’s the Jewish people’s homeland.
I would say for the Jews. It’s the Jewish people’s homeland.
Steven Bonnell
Real quick, I just want for both of you guys, because I haven’t heard these questions answered, I’m just so curious how to make sense of them. It was correctly brought up that I believe that Ben-Gurion had, I think Shlomo Ben-Ami describes it as an obsession with getting validation or support from Western states; Great Britain, and then a couple of decades later- [inaudible 01:08:44].
Real quick, I just want for both of you guys, because I haven’t heard these questions answered, I’m just so curious how to make sense of them. It was correctly brought up that I believe that Ben-Gurion had, I think Shlomo Ben-Ami describes it as an obsession with getting validation or support from Western states; Great Britain, and then a couple of decades later- [inaudible 01:08:44].
Mouin Rabbani
That explains the Suez Crisis.
That explains the Suez Crisis.
Steven Bonnell
Yeah, exactly. Correct. That was one of the major motivators, the idea to work with Britain and France on a military operation.
Yeah, exactly. Correct. That was one of the major motivators, the idea to work with Britain and France on a military operation.
Mouin Rabbani
An imperial stooge.
An imperial stooge.
Steven Bonnell
But then the question again I go back to, if that is true, if Ben-Gurion, if the early Israel saw themselves as a Western-fashioned nation, how could we possibly imagine that they would’ve engaged in the transfer of some 400,000 Arabs after accepting the partition plan? Would that not have completely and totally destroyed their legitimacy in the eyes of the entire Western world?
But then the question again I go back to, if that is true, if Ben-Gurion, if the early Israel saw themselves as a Western-fashioned nation, how could we possibly imagine that they would’ve engaged in the transfer of some 400,000 Arabs after accepting the partition plan? Would that not have completely and totally destroyed their legitimacy in the eyes of the entire Western world?
Mouin Rabbani
No.
No.
Steven Bonnell
How not?
How not?
Mouin Rabbani
Well, first of all, I think that the Zionist leadership’s acceptance of the partition resolution, and I think you may have written about this, that they accepted it because it provided international endorsement of the legitimacy of the principle of Jewish statehood. And they didn’t accept the borders, and in fact, later expanded the borders. Second of all-
Well, first of all, I think that the Zionist leadership’s acceptance of the partition resolution, and I think you may have written about this, that they accepted it because it provided international endorsement of the legitimacy of the principle of Jewish statehood. And they didn’t accept the borders, and in fact, later expanded the borders. Second of all-
Benny Morris
No, they didn’t. They didn’t expand the borders. They accepted the UN partition resolution, borders and all. That’s how they accepted it. You can say that some of the Zionists, deep in their hearts, had the idea that maybe at some point, they would ne able to get more.
No, they didn’t. They didn’t expand the borders. They accepted the UN partition resolution, borders and all. That’s how they accepted it. You can say that some of the Zionists, deep in their hearts, had the idea that maybe at some point, they would ne able to get more.
Mouin Rabbani
Yeah, including their most senior leaders, who said so, and I think you’ve quoted them saying so.
Yeah, including their most senior leaders, who said so, and I think you’ve quoted them saying so.
Benny Morris
But they begrudgingly accepted what the United Nations, the world community had said; “This is what you’re going to get.”
But they begrudgingly accepted what the United Nations, the world community had said; “This is what you’re going to get.”
Mouin Rabbani
Yes. And second of all, removing dark people? Darker people? It’s intrinsic-
Yes. And second of all, removing dark people? Darker people? It’s intrinsic-
Benny Morris
Why dark? In Israel, Jews are as dark as Arabs. This is nonsense.
Why dark? In Israel, Jews are as dark as Arabs. This is nonsense.
Mouin Rabbani
It’s intrinsic to Western history. So the idea that Americans or Brits or the French would have an issue with … I mean, French had been doing it in Algeria for decades. The Americans have been doing it in North America for centuries. So how would Israel forcibly displacing Palestinians somehow besmirch Israel in the eyes of the West?
It’s intrinsic to Western history. So the idea that Americans or Brits or the French would have an issue with … I mean, French had been doing it in Algeria for decades. The Americans have been doing it in North America for centuries. So how would Israel forcibly displacing Palestinians somehow besmirch Israel in the eyes of the West?
Norman Finkelstein
In fact, even in the 1944 resolution of the Labor Party, and at the time, even Bertrand Russell was a member of the Labor Party, it endorsed transfer of Arabs out of Palestine. As [inaudible 01:10:55] pointed out, that was a deeply entrenched idea in Western thinking, that it doesn’t in any way contradict or violate or breach any moral values to displace the Palestinian population.
In fact, even in the 1944 resolution of the Labor Party, and at the time, even Bertrand Russell was a member of the Labor Party, it endorsed transfer of Arabs out of Palestine. As [inaudible 01:10:55] pointed out, that was a deeply entrenched idea in Western thinking, that it doesn’t in any way contradict or violate or breach any moral values to displace the Palestinian population.
Now, I do believe there’s a legitimate question, had it been the case, as you said, Professor Morris, that the Zionists wanted to create a happy state with a Jewish majority, but a large Jewish minority, and if by virtue of immigration, like in our own country … in our own country, given the current trajectories, non-whites will become the majority population in the United States quite soon. And according to democratic principles, we have to accept that. So if that were the case, I would say maybe there’s an argument that had there been mass Jewish immigration that changed the demographic balance in Palestine and therefore Jews became the majority, you can make an argument in the abstract that the indigenous Arab population should have been accepting of that, just as ‘whites’ in the United States have to be accepting of the fact that the demographic majority is shifting to non-whites in our own country.
But that’s not what Zionism was about. I did write my doctoral dissertation on Zionism, and I don’t want to get now bogged down in abstract ideas, but as I suspect you know, most theorists of nationalism say there are two kinds of nationalism. One is a nationalism based on citizenship. You become a citizen, you’re integral to the country. That’s sometimes called political nationalism. And then there’s another kind of nationalism, and that says the state should not belong to its citizens, it should belong to an ethnic group. Each ethnic group should have its own state. It’s usually called the German romantic idea of nationalism.
Zionism is squarely in the German romantic idea. That was the whole point of Zionism. “We don’t want to be bundists and be one more ethnic minority in Russia. We don’t want to become citizens and just become a Jewish people in England or France. We want our own state-
Steven Bonnell
Like the Arab 23 states.
Like the Arab 23 states.
Norman Finkelstein
No, wait, before we get to the Arabs, let’s stick to the Jews for a moment. Or the Zionists. “We want our own state.” And in that concept of wanting your own state, the minority, at best, lives on sufferance, and at worst gets expelled. That’s the logic of the German romantic Zionist idea of a state. That’s why they’re Zionists.
No, wait, before we get to the Arabs, let’s stick to the Jews for a moment. Or the Zionists. “We want our own state.” And in that concept of wanting your own state, the minority, at best, lives on sufferance, and at worst gets expelled. That’s the logic of the German romantic Zionist idea of a state. That’s why they’re Zionists.
Now, I personally have shied away from using the word Zionism ever since I finished my doctoral dissertation, because-
Mouin Rabbani
It was that painful.
It was that painful.
Norman Finkelstein
Because as I said, I don’t believe it’s the operative ideology today. It’s like talking about bolshevism and referring to Khrushchev. I doubt Khrushchev could have spelled Bolshevik. But for the period we’re talking about, they were Zionists, they were committed to their exclusive state with a minority living on sufferance, or at worst expelled. That was their ideology. And I really feel there’s a problem with your happy vision of these Western Democrats like Weitzman, and they wanted to live peacefully with their Arabs. Weitzman described the expulsion in 1948 as ‘the miraculous clearing of the land.’ That doesn’t sound like somebody shedding too many tears at the loss of the indigenous population.
Because as I said, I don’t believe it’s the operative ideology today. It’s like talking about bolshevism and referring to Khrushchev. I doubt Khrushchev could have spelled Bolshevik. But for the period we’re talking about, they were Zionists, they were committed to their exclusive state with a minority living on sufferance, or at worst expelled. That was their ideology. And I really feel there’s a problem with your happy vision of these Western Democrats like Weitzman, and they wanted to live peacefully with their Arabs. Weitzman described the expulsion in 1948 as ‘the miraculous clearing of the land.’ That doesn’t sound like somebody shedding too many tears at the loss of the indigenous population.
Benny Morris
Let me just respond to the word on sufferance.
Let me just respond to the word on sufferance.
Lex Fridman
Let him respond.
Let him respond.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay.
Okay.
Benny Morris
The on sufferance, I don’t agree with. I think that’s wrong. The Jewish state came into being in 1948. It had a population which was 20% Arab when it came into being, after many of them had become refugees, but 20% remained in the country. 20% of Israel’s population at inception in 1949 was Arab.
The on sufferance, I don’t agree with. I think that’s wrong. The Jewish state came into being in 1948. It had a population which was 20% Arab when it came into being, after many of them had become refugees, but 20% remained in the country. 20% of Israel’s population at inception in 1949 was Arab.
Mouin Rabbani
80% went missing.
80% went missing.
Benny Morris
No, no, no. I was talking about what remained in Palestine/Israel after it was created. The 20% who lived in Israel received citizenship and all the rights of Israelis, except, of course, the right to serve in the Army, which they didn’t want to. And they had Supreme Court Justices, they have Knesset members. They enjoyed basically-
No, no, no. I was talking about what remained in Palestine/Israel after it was created. The 20% who lived in Israel received citizenship and all the rights of Israelis, except, of course, the right to serve in the Army, which they didn’t want to. And they had Supreme Court Justices, they have Knesset members. They enjoyed basically-
Norman Finkelstein
I think they lived under emergency laws until 1966.
I think they lived under emergency laws until 1966.
Benny Morris
For a period, sure, they lived under emergency-
For a period, sure, they lived under emergency-
Norman Finkelstein
So they didn’t immediately have citizenship. This is just fantasy.
So they didn’t immediately have citizenship. This is just fantasy.
Benny Morris
No, no, no, no. Wait a minute. It’s not fantasy. At the beginning, they received citizenship, could vote in elections for their own people, and they were put into parliament. But in the first years, the Jewish majority suspected that maybe the Arabs would be disloyal, because they had just tried to destroy the Jewish state. Then they dropped the military government and they became fully equal citizens. So if the whole idea was they must have a state without Arabs, this didn’t happen in ’49, and it didn’t happen in the subsequent decades.
No, no, no, no. Wait a minute. It’s not fantasy. At the beginning, they received citizenship, could vote in elections for their own people, and they were put into parliament. But in the first years, the Jewish majority suspected that maybe the Arabs would be disloyal, because they had just tried to destroy the Jewish state. Then they dropped the military government and they became fully equal citizens. So if the whole idea was they must have a state without Arabs, this didn’t happen in ’49, and it didn’t happen in the subsequent decades.
Norman Finkelstein
So Professor Morris, then why did you say without a population expulsion, a Jewish state would not have been established?
So Professor Morris, then why did you say without a population expulsion, a Jewish state would not have been established?
Benny Morris
Because you are missing the first section of that paragraph, which was they were being assaulted by the Arabs, and as a result, a Jewish state could not have come into being unless there had also been an expulsion of the population which was trying to kill them.
Because you are missing the first section of that paragraph, which was they were being assaulted by the Arabs, and as a result, a Jewish state could not have come into being unless there had also been an expulsion of the population which was trying to kill them.
Lex Fridman
Norm, I’m officially forbidding you referencing that again. Hold on a second, wait. We responded to it. So the main point you’re making, we have to take Benny at his word, is there was a war, and that’s the reason why he made that statement.
Norm, I’m officially forbidding you referencing that again. Hold on a second, wait. We responded to it. So the main point you’re making, we have to take Benny at his word, is there was a war, and that’s the reason why he made that statement.
Mouin Rabbani
I think just one last point on this. I remember reading your book when it first came out, and reading one incident after the other, and one example after the other, and then getting to the conclusion where you said the Nakba was a product of war, not design, I think were your exact words. And I remember reacting almost in shock to that, that I felt you had mobilized overwhelming evidence that it was a product of design, not war. And I think our discussion today very much reflects, let’s say, the dissonance between the evidence and the conclusion. You don’t feel that the research that you have conducted and published demonstrates that it was in fact inherent and inbuilt and inevitable. And I think the point that Norm and I are making is that your own historical research, together with that of others, indisputably demonstrates that it does. I think that’s a fundamental disagreement we’re having here.
I think just one last point on this. I remember reading your book when it first came out, and reading one incident after the other, and one example after the other, and then getting to the conclusion where you said the Nakba was a product of war, not design, I think were your exact words. And I remember reacting almost in shock to that, that I felt you had mobilized overwhelming evidence that it was a product of design, not war. And I think our discussion today very much reflects, let’s say, the dissonance between the evidence and the conclusion. You don’t feel that the research that you have conducted and published demonstrates that it was in fact inherent and inbuilt and inevitable. And I think the point that Norm and I are making is that your own historical research, together with that of others, indisputably demonstrates that it does. I think that’s a fundamental disagreement we’re having here.
Steven Bonnell
Well, yeah, can I actually respond to that? Because I think this is emblematic of the entire conversation. I watched a lot of Norm’s interviews and conversations in preparation for this, and I hear Norm will say this over and over and over again. “I only deal in facts. I don’t deal in hypotheticals. I only deal in facts. I only deal in facts.” And that seems to be the case, except for when the facts are completely and totally contrary to the particular point you’re trying to push. The idea that Jews would’ve out of hand rejected any state that had Arabs on it or always had a plan of expulsion is just betrayed by the acceptance of the ’47 partition plan.
Well, yeah, can I actually respond to that? Because I think this is emblematic of the entire conversation. I watched a lot of Norm’s interviews and conversations in preparation for this, and I hear Norm will say this over and over and over again. “I only deal in facts. I don’t deal in hypotheticals. I only deal in facts. I only deal in facts.” And that seems to be the case, except for when the facts are completely and totally contrary to the particular point you’re trying to push. The idea that Jews would’ve out of hand rejected any state that had Arabs on it or always had a plan of expulsion is just betrayed by the acceptance of the ’47 partition plan.
Norman Finkelstein
I don’t think you understand politics. Did I just say that there is a chasm that separates your ideology from the limits and constraints imposed by politics and reality? Now, Professor Morris, I suspect, would agree that the Zionist movement from fairly early on was committed to the idea of a Jewish state. I am aware of only one major study, probably written 40 years ago, The Binational Idea in Mandatory Palestine by a woman. I forgot her name now. You remember her?
I don’t think you understand politics. Did I just say that there is a chasm that separates your ideology from the limits and constraints imposed by politics and reality? Now, Professor Morris, I suspect, would agree that the Zionist movement from fairly early on was committed to the idea of a Jewish state. I am aware of only one major study, probably written 40 years ago, The Binational Idea in Mandatory Palestine by a woman. I forgot her name now. You remember her?
Benny Morris
I’m trying to.
I’m trying to.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah. Okay. But you know the book.
Yeah. Okay. But you know the book.
Benny Morris
I think so.
I think so.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah. She is the only one who tried to persuasively argue that the Zionist movement was actually, not formally, actually committed to the binational idea. But most historians of the subject agree, the Zionist movement was committed to the idea of a Jewish state. Having written my doctoral dissertation on the topic, I was confirmed in that idea, because Professor Chomsky, who was my closest friend for about 40 years, was very committed to the idea that bi-nationalism was the dominant trend in Zionism. I couldn’t go with him there.
Yeah. She is the only one who tried to persuasively argue that the Zionist movement was actually, not formally, actually committed to the binational idea. But most historians of the subject agree, the Zionist movement was committed to the idea of a Jewish state. Having written my doctoral dissertation on the topic, I was confirmed in that idea, because Professor Chomsky, who was my closest friend for about 40 years, was very committed to the idea that bi-nationalism was the dominant trend in Zionism. I couldn’t go with him there.
But Professor Morris, you are aware that until the Biltmore resolution in 1942, the Zionist movement never declared it was for a Jewish state. Why? Because it was politically impossible at the moment, until 1942. There’s your ideology, there are your convictions, there are your operative plans, and there’s also, separately, what you say in public. The Zionist movement couldn’t say in public, “We’re expelling all the Arabs.” They can’t say that. And they couldn’t even say, “We support a Jewish state,” until 1942.
Benny Morris
You’re conflating two things. The Zionists wanted a Jewish state. Correct. That didn’t mean expulsion of the Arabs. It’s not the same thing. They wanted a Jewish state with a Jewish majority, but they were willing, as it turned out, both in ’37 and in ’47 and subsequently, to have a large Arab minority-
You’re conflating two things. The Zionists wanted a Jewish state. Correct. That didn’t mean expulsion of the Arabs. It’s not the same thing. They wanted a Jewish state with a Jewish majority, but they were willing, as it turned out, both in ’37 and in ’47 and subsequently, to have a large Arab minority-
Norman Finkelstein
In ’37 there was a transfer.
In ’37 there was a transfer.
Benny Morris
They were willing to have a large Arab minority in the country, and they ended up with a large Arab minority in the country. 20% of the population in ’49 was Arab, and it still is-
They were willing to have a large Arab minority in the country, and they ended up with a large Arab minority in the country. 20% of the population in ’49 was Arab, and it still is-
Norman Finkelstein
They ended up for about five minutes before they were expelled. They agreed to it up until ’47, and then they were gone by March 1949.
They ended up for about five minutes before they were expelled. They agreed to it up until ’47, and then they were gone by March 1949.
Steven Bonnell
What happened in between the rejection of the partition plan and the expulsion of the Arabs?
What happened in between the rejection of the partition plan and the expulsion of the Arabs?
Benny Morris
The Arabs launched the war.
The Arabs launched the war.
Steven Bonnell
Well, yeah. It wasn’t random. There is a potential that-
Well, yeah. It wasn’t random. There is a potential that-
Norman Finkelstein
I agree. It wasn’t random. I totally agree with that. It was by design. It wasn’t random.
I agree. It wasn’t random. I totally agree with that. It was by design. It wasn’t random.
Steven Bonnell
You can say that, but in this case, the facts betray you. There was no Arab acceptance of anything that would’ve allowed for a Jewish state to exist, number one, and number two, I think that it’s entirely possible, given how things happen after a war, that this exact same conflict could have played out and an expulsion would’ve happened without any ideology at play. There was a people that disagreed on who had territorial rights to a land, there was a massive war afterwards, and then a bunch of their friends invaded after to reinforce the idea that the Jewish people in this case couldn’t have a state. There could have been a transfer regardless.
You can say that, but in this case, the facts betray you. There was no Arab acceptance of anything that would’ve allowed for a Jewish state to exist, number one, and number two, I think that it’s entirely possible, given how things happen after a war, that this exact same conflict could have played out and an expulsion would’ve happened without any ideology at play. There was a people that disagreed on who had territorial rights to a land, there was a massive war afterwards, and then a bunch of their friends invaded after to reinforce the idea that the Jewish people in this case couldn’t have a state. There could have been a transfer regardless.
Norman Finkelstein
Anything could have been, but that’s not what history is about.
Anything could have been, but that’s not what history is about.
Steven Bonnell
History is about Palestinian rejections to any peace deal, over and over and over again.
History is about Palestinian rejections to any peace deal, over and over and over again.
Norman Finkelstein
As I said, when the ball was thrown into the court of the United Nations, they were faced with a practical problem, and I, for one, am not going to try to adjudicate the rights and wrongs from the beginning. I do not believe that if territorial displacement and dispossession was inherent in the Zionist project, I do not believe it can be a legitimate political enterprise. Now, you might say that’s speaking from 2022. Or where are we now?
As I said, when the ball was thrown into the court of the United Nations, they were faced with a practical problem, and I, for one, am not going to try to adjudicate the rights and wrongs from the beginning. I do not believe that if territorial displacement and dispossession was inherent in the Zionist project, I do not believe it can be a legitimate political enterprise. Now, you might say that’s speaking from 2022. Or where are we now?
Mouin Rabbani
’24 now, I think. Yeah.
’24 now, I think. Yeah.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. But we have to recognize that from nearly the beginning, for perfectly obvious reasons having nothing to do with antisemitism, anti-Westernism, anti-Europeanism, but because no people that I am aware of would voluntarily cede its country-
Okay. But we have to recognize that from nearly the beginning, for perfectly obvious reasons having nothing to do with antisemitism, anti-Westernism, anti-Europeanism, but because no people that I am aware of would voluntarily cede its country-
Steven Bonnell
Except for all the people that sold land voluntarily.
Except for all the people that sold land voluntarily.
Norman Finkelstein
You can perfectly understand Native American resistance to Euro-colonialism. You can perfectly well understand it without any anti-Europeanism, anti-whiteism, anti-Christianism. They didn’t want to cede their country to invaders. That’s completely understandable.
You can perfectly understand Native American resistance to Euro-colonialism. You can perfectly well understand it without any anti-Europeanism, anti-whiteism, anti-Christianism. They didn’t want to cede their country to invaders. That’s completely understandable.
Benny Morris
You’re minimizing the antisemitic element in Arab nationalism.
You’re minimizing the antisemitic element in Arab nationalism.
Norman Finkelstein
You minimized it. In all your books, you minimized it.
You minimized it. In all your books, you minimized it.
Benny Morris
No, no, no. Husseini was an antisemite. The leader of the Palestinian national movement in the ’30s and ’40s was an antisemite. This was one of the things which drove him, and also drove him in the end to work in Berlin for Hitler for four years, giving Nazi propaganda to the Arab world, calling on the Arabs to murder the Jews. That’s what he did in World War II. That’s the leader of the Palestinian Arab National Movement. And he wasn’t alone. He wasn’t alone.
No, no, no. Husseini was an antisemite. The leader of the Palestinian national movement in the ’30s and ’40s was an antisemite. This was one of the things which drove him, and also drove him in the end to work in Berlin for Hitler for four years, giving Nazi propaganda to the Arab world, calling on the Arabs to murder the Jews. That’s what he did in World War II. That’s the leader of the Palestinian Arab National Movement. And he wasn’t alone. He wasn’t alone.
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris, if you read your book, Righteous Victims, you can read it and read it and read it and read it, as I have, you will find barely a word about the Arabs being motivated by antisemitism.
Professor Morris, if you read your book, Righteous Victims, you can read it and read it and read it and read it, as I have, you will find barely a word about the Arabs being motivated by antisemitism.
Benny Morris
It exists, though.
It exists, though.
Norman Finkelstein
I didn’t say it doesn’t exist.
I didn’t say it doesn’t exist.
Benny Morris
Ah, you agree that it exists?
Ah, you agree that it exists?
Norman Finkelstein
Hey, I don’t know a single non-Jew who doesn’t harbor antisemitic sentiments.
Hey, I don’t know a single non-Jew who doesn’t harbor antisemitic sentiments.
Benny Morris
We’re talking about Arabs now.
We’re talking about Arabs now.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah, but I don’t know anybody. That’s just part of the human condition.
Yeah, but I don’t know anybody. That’s just part of the human condition.
Benny Morris
Antisemitism?
Antisemitism?
Norman Finkelstein
Yes.
Yes.
Benny Morris
And among the Arabs?
And among the Arabs?
Norman Finkelstein
So Professor Morris, here’s my problem. I didn’t see that in your Righteous Victims. Even when you talked about the first Intifada, and you talked about the second Intifada, and you talked about how there was a lot of influence by Hamas, the Islamic movement, you even stated that there was a lot of antisemitism in those movements, but then you went on to say, “But of course, at bottom, it was about the occupation. It wasn’t about” … And I’ve read it.
So Professor Morris, here’s my problem. I didn’t see that in your Righteous Victims. Even when you talked about the first Intifada, and you talked about the second Intifada, and you talked about how there was a lot of influence by Hamas, the Islamic movement, you even stated that there was a lot of antisemitism in those movements, but then you went on to say, “But of course, at bottom, it was about the occupation. It wasn’t about” … And I’ve read it.
Benny Morris
Yeah, but you’re moving from different ages, across the ages.
Yeah, but you’re moving from different ages, across the ages.
Norman Finkelstein
No, I’m talking about your whole book.
No, I’m talking about your whole book.
Benny Morris
The occupation began in ’67, the one you’re talking about.
The occupation began in ’67, the one you’re talking about.
Norman Finkelstein
I looked and looked and looked for evidence of this antisemitism as being a chief motor of Arab resistance to Zionism. I didn’t see it.
I looked and looked and looked for evidence of this antisemitism as being a chief motor of Arab resistance to Zionism. I didn’t see it.
Steven Bonnell
Did he make that claim?
Did he make that claim?
Benny Morris
I don’t remember the word chief. It’s one of the elements.
I don’t remember the word chief. It’s one of the elements.
Steven Bonnell
Yeah. It’s very binary thinking when it comes to-
Yeah. It’s very binary thinking when it comes to-
Norman Finkelstein
Binary?
Binary?
Steven Bonnell
Yes, binary.
Yes, binary.
Norman Finkelstein
Please, don’t give me this postmodernism ‘binary’. You’re the one that said the chief motor-
Please, don’t give me this postmodernism ‘binary’. You’re the one that said the chief motor-
Benny Morris
But you are thinking in terms of black and white. Steven has a point.
But you are thinking in terms of black and white. Steven has a point.
Norman Finkelstein
Do you have your book here? Page 137.
Do you have your book here? Page 137.
Benny Morris
You’re talking in black and white concepts when history is much grayer. Lots of things happen because of lots of reasons, not one or the other, and you don’t seem to see that.
You’re talking in black and white concepts when history is much grayer. Lots of things happen because of lots of reasons, not one or the other, and you don’t seem to see that.
Steven Bonnell
Can I ask you a question? Because it’s for them to talk too. Can I ask you a very quick question? What do you think the ideal solution was on the Arab side from ’47? What would they have preferred? And what would’ve happened-
Can I ask you a question? Because it’s for them to talk too. Can I ask you a very quick question? What do you think the ideal solution was on the Arab side from ’47? What would they have preferred? And what would’ve happened-
Mouin Rabbani
Well, they were explicit.
Well, they were explicit.
Steven Bonnell
And then the second one, what would’ve happened if Jews would’ve lost the war in ’48? What do you think would’ve happened to the Israeli population, the Jewish population?
And then the second one, what would’ve happened if Jews would’ve lost the war in ’48? What do you think would’ve happened to the Israeli population, the Jewish population?
Mouin Rabbani
I think the Palestinians and the Arabs were explicit that they wanted a unitary, I think, federal state, and they made their submissions to [inaudible 01:28:09], they made their appeals at the UN General Assembly.
I think the Palestinians and the Arabs were explicit that they wanted a unitary, I think, federal state, and they made their submissions to [inaudible 01:28:09], they made their appeals at the UN General Assembly.
Benny Morris
What do you mean by unitary and federal? I don’t get that. They wanted an Arab state. They wanted Palestine to be an Arab state.
What do you mean by unitary and federal? I don’t get that. They wanted an Arab state. They wanted Palestine to be an Arab state.
Mouin Rabbani
Yes. Yes.
Yes. Yes.
Benny Morris
Put it simply. That word, unitary, federal, they wanted Palestine as an Arab and exclusively Arab state. That’s what they wanted.
Put it simply. That word, unitary, federal, they wanted Palestine as an Arab and exclusively Arab state. That’s what they wanted.
Mouin Rabbani
No, no, it wasn’t an exclusively Arab state. I think we have to distinguish between Palestinian and Arab opposition to a Jewish state in Palestine on the one hand, and Palestinian and Arab attitudes to Jewish existence in Palestine, and there’s a fundamental difference-
No, no, it wasn’t an exclusively Arab state. I think we have to distinguish between Palestinian and Arab opposition to a Jewish state in Palestine on the one hand, and Palestinian and Arab attitudes to Jewish existence in Palestine, and there’s a fundamental difference-
Benny Morris
Well, Husseini, the leader of the movement, said that all the Jews who had come since 1917, and that’s the majority of the Jews in Palestine in 1947, shouldn’t be there.
Well, Husseini, the leader of the movement, said that all the Jews who had come since 1917, and that’s the majority of the Jews in Palestine in 1947, shouldn’t be there.
Mouin Rabbani
Well, he did say-
Well, he did say-
Benny Morris
They shouldn’t be citizens and they shouldn’t be there.
They shouldn’t be citizens and they shouldn’t be there.
Norman Finkelstein
[inaudible 01:28:59]. The PLO charter said that in ’64. I’m not going to deny it. Of course, it’s true. I can understand the sentiment, but I think it’s wrong.
[inaudible 01:28:59]. The PLO charter said that in ’64. I’m not going to deny it. Of course, it’s true. I can understand the sentiment, but I think it’s wrong.
Steven Bonnell
Also, [inaudible 01:29:11] because you had the used the words earlier, that it was supremacy and exclusivity that the Zionist state-
Also, [inaudible 01:29:11] because you had the used the words earlier, that it was supremacy and exclusivity that the Zionist state-
Mouin Rabbani
Well, I want to answer your question. Husseini did say that, and I’m sure there was a very substantial body of Palestinian Arab public opinion that endorsed that. But by the same token, I think a unitary Arab state, as you call it, or a Palestinian state, could have been established, with arrangements, with guarantees to ensure the security and rights of both communities. How that would work in detail had been discussed and proposed, but never resolved. And again, I think Jewish fears about what would’ve happened-
Well, I want to answer your question. Husseini did say that, and I’m sure there was a very substantial body of Palestinian Arab public opinion that endorsed that. But by the same token, I think a unitary Arab state, as you call it, or a Palestinian state, could have been established, with arrangements, with guarantees to ensure the security and rights of both communities. How that would work in detail had been discussed and proposed, but never resolved. And again, I think Jewish fears about what would’ve happened-
Benny Morris
A second Holocaust.
A second Holocaust.
Mouin Rabbani
Well, no-
Well, no-
Benny Morris
That was the Jewish fear. A second Holocaust.
That was the Jewish fear. A second Holocaust.
Mouin Rabbani
Well, that may well have been the Jewish fear. It was an unfounded Jewish fear.
Well, that may well have been the Jewish fear. It was an unfounded Jewish fear.
Steven Bonnell
It was unfounded?
It was unfounded?
Mouin Rabbani
Of course it was unfounded.
Of course it was unfounded.
Steven Bonnell
What about like in ’48 and ’56 and-
What about like in ’48 and ’56 and-
Mouin Rabbani
You really think that the Palestinians, had they won the war, were going to import ovens and crematoria from Germany and-
You really think that the Palestinians, had they won the war, were going to import ovens and crematoria from Germany and-
Steven Bonnell
I don’t know about that, but in almost every single Arab state where there were Jews living, after ’48, after ’56, after ’67, there were always pogroms, there were always flights from Jews from those countries to Israel afterwards. I don’t think it would be-
I don’t know about that, but in almost every single Arab state where there were Jews living, after ’48, after ’56, after ’67, there were always pogroms, there were always flights from Jews from those countries to Israel afterwards. I don’t think it would be-
Mouin Rabbani
I wouldn’t say there were always pogroms in every Arab state. I think there was flight of Arab Jews for multiple reasons, in some cases for precisely the reasons you say. If you look at the Jewish community in Algeria, for example, their flight had virtually nothing to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict. The issue of Algerian Jews was that the French gave them citizenship during their colonial rule of Algeria, and they increasingly became identified with French rule, when Algeria became independent and all the French ended up leaving, out of fear, or out of disappointment, or out of whatever, the Jews were identified as French rather than Algerian.
I wouldn’t say there were always pogroms in every Arab state. I think there was flight of Arab Jews for multiple reasons, in some cases for precisely the reasons you say. If you look at the Jewish community in Algeria, for example, their flight had virtually nothing to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict. The issue of Algerian Jews was that the French gave them citizenship during their colonial rule of Algeria, and they increasingly became identified with French rule, when Algeria became independent and all the French ended up leaving, out of fear, or out of disappointment, or out of whatever, the Jews were identified as French rather than Algerian.
Benny Morris
This is a bit of a red herring. There were pogroms in the Arab countries. In Bahrain even, where there’s almost no Jews, there was a pogrom in 1947. There was a pogrom in Aleppo in 1947.
This is a bit of a red herring. There were pogroms in the Arab countries. In Bahrain even, where there’s almost no Jews, there was a pogrom in 1947. There was a pogrom in Aleppo in 1947.
Mouin Rabbani
I’m not denying any of that history.
I’m not denying any of that history.
Benny Morris
There were killings of Jews in Iraq and Egypt in 1948/49. But the Jews basically fled the Arab states, not for multiple reasons. They fled because they felt that the governments there and the societies amid which they had lived for hundreds of years no longer wanted them.
There were killings of Jews in Iraq and Egypt in 1948/49. But the Jews basically fled the Arab states, not for multiple reasons. They fled because they felt that the governments there and the societies amid which they had lived for hundreds of years no longer wanted them.
Mouin Rabbani
Look, without getting into the details, I think we can both agree that ultimately a clear majority of Arab Jews who believed that after having lived in these countries for centuries-
Look, without getting into the details, I think we can both agree that ultimately a clear majority of Arab Jews who believed that after having lived in these countries for centuries-
Benny Morris
Way before the Arabs arrived there. Way before the Arabs arrived in Iraq.
Way before the Arabs arrived there. Way before the Arabs arrived in Iraq.
Mouin Rabbani
… for centuries, if not millennia, came to the unfortunate conclusion that their situation had become untenable. I also think that we can both agree that this had never been an issue prior to Zionism and the emergence of the state of Israel.
… for centuries, if not millennia, came to the unfortunate conclusion that their situation had become untenable. I also think that we can both agree that this had never been an issue prior to Zionism and the emergence of the state of Israel.
Benny Morris
This isn’t true. There were pogroms prior to Zionism.
This isn’t true. There were pogroms prior to Zionism.
Mouin Rabbani
Look, I’m not-
Look, I’m not-
Benny Morris
Pogroms didn’t begin with Zionism in the Arab world.
Pogroms didn’t begin with Zionism in the Arab world.
Mouin Rabbani
The issue is the point I raised, which is whether these communities had ever come to a collective conclusion that their position had become untenable in this part of the world. No, they were Arab Jews.
The issue is the point I raised, which is whether these communities had ever come to a collective conclusion that their position had become untenable in this part of the world. No, they were Arab Jews.
Steven Bonnell
Well, because untenable meant there was no alternative. But with the creation of Israel, there was an alternative, right? A place where they could go and not be discriminated against or live as second class citizens or be subject to Arab majority states.
Well, because untenable meant there was no alternative. But with the creation of Israel, there was an alternative, right? A place where they could go and not be discriminated against or live as second class citizens or be subject to Arab majority states.
I also think it’s interesting that when you analyze the flight of Jewish people, and I’ve seen this, I agree with you, it wasn’t just a mass expulsion from all the Arab states. There were definitely push factors. There were also pull factors. Now, I don’t know how you guys feel about the Nakba, but when the analysis of the Nakba comes in, again, it’s back to that; well, that was actually just a top-down expulsion. The retreat of wealthy Arab people in the ’30s didn’t matter. Any of the messaging from the surrounding Arab states didn’t matter. It was just an expulsion from Jewish people or people running from their lives from Jewish massacres. Again, I feel like it’s a selective critical analysis of the-
Mouin Rabbani
Again, I’m a little uncomfortable always using the term Jewish here, because it wasn’t the Jews of England or the Soviet Jews.
Again, I’m a little uncomfortable always using the term Jewish here, because it wasn’t the Jews of England or the Soviet Jews.
Steven Bonnell
Well, I say Jewish because prior to ’48, saying Israeli-
Well, I say Jewish because prior to ’48, saying Israeli-
Mouin Rabbani
I think it’s useful to refer to Zionists before 1948 and Israelis after ’48. We don’t need to implicate Jews of all-
I think it’s useful to refer to Zionists before 1948 and Israelis after ’48. We don’t need to implicate Jews of all-
Steven Bonnell
Well, sure, but the Jewish people that were being attacked in Arab states weren’t Zionists. They were just Jews living there, right?
Well, sure, but the Jewish people that were being attacked in Arab states weren’t Zionists. They were just Jews living there, right?
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, I need to just comment on that. I was rereading Shlomo Ben-Ami’s last book, and he does at the end discuss at some length the whole issue of the refugee question bearing on the so-called peace process. And on the question of ’48 and the Arab immigration, if you’ll allow me, let me just quote him. “Israel is particularly fond of the awkwardly false symmetry she makes between the Palestinian refugee crisis and the forced immigration of 600,000 Jews from Arab countries following the creation of the state of Israel, as if it were ‘an unplanned exchange of populations.’.
Okay, I need to just comment on that. I was rereading Shlomo Ben-Ami’s last book, and he does at the end discuss at some length the whole issue of the refugee question bearing on the so-called peace process. And on the question of ’48 and the Arab immigration, if you’ll allow me, let me just quote him. “Israel is particularly fond of the awkwardly false symmetry she makes between the Palestinian refugee crisis and the forced immigration of 600,000 Jews from Arab countries following the creation of the state of Israel, as if it were ‘an unplanned exchange of populations.’.
And then Mr Ben-Ami, for those of you who are listening, he was Israel’s former foreign minister, and he’s an influential historian in his own right, he says, “In fact, envoys from the Mossad and the Jewish Agency worked underground in Arab countries and Iran to encourage Jews to go to Israel. More importantly, for many Jews in Arab states, the very possibility of immigrating to Israel was the combination of millennial aspirations. It represented the consummation of a dream to take part in Israel’s resurgence as a nation.”
So this idea that they were all expelled after 1948, that’s one area, Professor Morris, I defer to expertise. That’s one of my credos in life. I don’t know the Israeli literature. But as it’s been translated in English, there’s very little solid scholarship on what happened in 1948 in the Arab countries which caused the Jews to leave.
Mouin Rabbani
Arab Jews.
Arab Jews.
Norman Finkelstein
Arab Jews, right. But Shlomo Ben-Ami knows the literature. He knows the scholarship. He’s a historian.
Arab Jews, right. But Shlomo Ben-Ami knows the literature. He knows the scholarship. He’s a historian.
Benny Morris
He comes from Tangiers.
He comes from Tangiers.
Mouin Rabbani
He’s from Morocco. [inaudible 01:36:10] from Iraq has written on this issue as well.
He’s from Morocco. [inaudible 01:36:10] from Iraq has written on this issue as well.
Benny Morris
And the Jews in the Arab lands were not pro-Zionists. They weren’t Zionists at all. Certainly [inaudible 01:36:18] family was anti-Zionist.
And the Jews in the Arab lands were not pro-Zionists. They weren’t Zionists at all. Certainly [inaudible 01:36:18] family was anti-Zionist.
Norman Finkelstein
And [inaudible 01:36:21], when he was interviewed by Marin Rappaport, on this question he said, “You simply cannot say that the Iraqi Jews were expelled. It’s just not true.” And he was speaking as an Iraqi Jew who left with his family in 1948.
And [inaudible 01:36:21], when he was interviewed by Marin Rappaport, on this question he said, “You simply cannot say that the Iraqi Jews were expelled. It’s just not true.” And he was speaking as an Iraqi Jew who left with his family in 1948.
Benny Morris
They were pushed out. They weren’t expelled. That’s probably the right phrase. They were pushed out.
They were pushed out. They weren’t expelled. That’s probably the right phrase. They were pushed out.
Mouin Rabbani
Well, I think it’s more complex than that. Sorry, I interrupted you.
Well, I think it’s more complex than that. Sorry, I interrupted you.
Norman Finkelstein
No, you’re not interrupting me, because I only know what’s been translated into English, and the English literature on the subject is very small and not scholarly. Now, there may be a Hebrew literature, I don’t know, but I was surprised that even Shlomo Ben-Ami, stalwart of his state, fair enough, on this particular point he called it false symmetry.
No, you’re not interrupting me, because I only know what’s been translated into English, and the English literature on the subject is very small and not scholarly. Now, there may be a Hebrew literature, I don’t know, but I was surprised that even Shlomo Ben-Ami, stalwart of his state, fair enough, on this particular point he called it false symmetry.
Benny Morris
No, no, Steven is right. There was a pull and a push mechanism in the departure of the Jews from the Arab lands post ’48. But there was also a lot of push. A lot of push.
No, no, Steven is right. There was a pull and a push mechanism in the departure of the Jews from the Arab lands post ’48. But there was also a lot of push. A lot of push.
Mouin Rabbani
That’s indisputable. There was push-
That’s indisputable. There was push-
Lex Fridman
And on the point of agreement, on this one brief light of agreement, let us wrap up with this topic of history and move on to modern day. But before that, I’m wondering if we could just say a couple of last words on this topic. Steven?
And on the point of agreement, on this one brief light of agreement, let us wrap up with this topic of history and move on to modern day. But before that, I’m wondering if we could just say a couple of last words on this topic. Steven?
Steven Bonnell
Yeah. I think that when you look at the behaviors of both parties in the time period around ’48, or especially ’48 and earlier, there’s this assumption that there was this huge built-in mechanism of Zionism, and that it was going to be inevitable from the inception of the first Zionist thought that appeared in Herzl’s mind that there would be a mass violent population transfer of Arab Palestinians out of what would become the Israeli state. I understand that there are some quotes that we can find that maybe seem to possibly support an idea that looks close to that, but I think when you actually consult the record of what happened, when you look at the massive populations that Israel was willing to accept within what would become their state borders, their nation borders, I just don’t think that the historical record agrees with the idea that Zionists would’ve just never been okay living alongside Arab Palestinians.
Yeah. I think that when you look at the behaviors of both parties in the time period around ’48, or especially ’48 and earlier, there’s this assumption that there was this huge built-in mechanism of Zionism, and that it was going to be inevitable from the inception of the first Zionist thought that appeared in Herzl’s mind that there would be a mass violent population transfer of Arab Palestinians out of what would become the Israeli state. I understand that there are some quotes that we can find that maybe seem to possibly support an idea that looks close to that, but I think when you actually consult the record of what happened, when you look at the massive populations that Israel was willing to accept within what would become their state borders, their nation borders, I just don’t think that the historical record agrees with the idea that Zionists would’ve just never been okay living alongside Arab Palestinians.
But when you look at the other side, Arabs would out of hand reject literally any deal that apportioned any amount of that land for any state relating to Jewish people or the Israeli people. I think it was said, even on the other end of the table, that Arab Palestinians or Arabs would’ve never accepted any Jewish state whatsoever.
So it’s interesting that on the ideology part where it’s claimed that Zionists are people of exclusion and supremacy and expulsion, we can find that in diary entries, but we can find that expressed in very real terms on the Arab side, I think in all of their behavior around ’48 and earlier, where the goal was the destruction of the Israeli state, it would’ve been the dispossession of many Jewish people. It probably would’ve been the expulsion of a lot of them back to Europe. And I think that very clearly plays out in the difference between the actions of the Arabs versus some diary entries of some Jewish leaders.
Lex Fridman
Benny?
Benny?
Benny Morris
Well, one thing which stood out, and I think Mouin made this point, is that the Arabs had nothing to do with the Holocaust, but then the world community forced the Arabs to pay the price for the Holocaust. That’s the traditional Arab argument. This is slightly distorting the reality. The Arabs in the 1930s did their utmost to prevent Jewish emigration from Europe and reaching Palestine, which was the only safe haven available, because America, Britain, France, nobody wanted Jews anywhere, and they were being persecuted in Central Europe and eventually would be massacred in large numbers. So the Arab effort to pressure the British to prevent Jews reaching Palestine’s safe shores contributed indirectly to the slaughter of many Jews in Europe because they couldn’t get to anywhere, and they couldn’t get to Palestine because the Arabs were busy attacking Jews in Palestine and attacking the British to make sure they didn’t allow Jews to reach this safe haven. That’s important.
Well, one thing which stood out, and I think Mouin made this point, is that the Arabs had nothing to do with the Holocaust, but then the world community forced the Arabs to pay the price for the Holocaust. That’s the traditional Arab argument. This is slightly distorting the reality. The Arabs in the 1930s did their utmost to prevent Jewish emigration from Europe and reaching Palestine, which was the only safe haven available, because America, Britain, France, nobody wanted Jews anywhere, and they were being persecuted in Central Europe and eventually would be massacred in large numbers. So the Arab effort to pressure the British to prevent Jews reaching Palestine’s safe shores contributed indirectly to the slaughter of many Jews in Europe because they couldn’t get to anywhere, and they couldn’t get to Palestine because the Arabs were busy attacking Jews in Palestine and attacking the British to make sure they didn’t allow Jews to reach this safe haven. That’s important.
The second thing is, of course, there’s no point in belittling the fact that the Palestinian Arab National Movement’s leader, Husseini, worked for the Nazis in the 1940s. He got a salary from the German foreign ministry, he raised troops among Muslims in Bosnia for the SS, and he broadcast to the Arab world calling for the murder of the Jews in the Middle East. This is what he did. And the Arabs since then have been trying to whitewash Husseini’s role. I’m not saying he was the instigator of the Holocaust, but he helped the Germans along in doing what they were doing and supported them in doing that. So this can’t be removed from the fact that the Arabs, as you say, paid a price for the Holocaust, but they also participated in various ways in helping it happen.
Lex Fridman
Mouin?
Mouin?
Mouin Rabbani
I’ll make two points. The first is you mentioned [inaudible 01:41:27] Husseini and his collaboration with the Nazis. Entirely legitimate point to raise. But I think one can also say definitively, had Husseini never existed, the Holocaust would’ve played out precisely as it did.
I’ll make two points. The first is you mentioned [inaudible 01:41:27] Husseini and his collaboration with the Nazis. Entirely legitimate point to raise. But I think one can also say definitively, had Husseini never existed, the Holocaust would’ve played out precisely as it did.
Benny Morris
Certainly. Certainly.
Certainly. Certainly.
Mouin Rabbani
As far as Palestinian opposition to Jewish emigration to Palestine during the 1930s is concerned, it was of a different character than, for example, British and American rejection of Jewish immigration-
As far as Palestinian opposition to Jewish emigration to Palestine during the 1930s is concerned, it was of a different character than, for example, British and American rejection of Jewish immigration-
Mouin Rabbani
… An American rejection of Jewish immigration. They just didn’t want Jews on their soil.
… An American rejection of Jewish immigration. They just didn’t want Jews on their soil.
Benny Morris
Objectively, it helped the Germans kill the Jews.
Objectively, it helped the Germans kill the Jews.
Mouin Rabbani
In the Palestinian case, their opposition to Jewish immigration was to prevent the transformation of their homeland into a Jewish state that would dispossess them, and I think that’s an important distinction to make. The other point I wanted to make is we’ve spent the past several hours talking about Zionism, transfer, and so on, but I think there’s a more fundamental aspect to this, which is that Zionism, I think, would have emerged and disappeared as yet one more utopian political project had it not been for the British, what the preeminent Palestinian historian, Walid Khalidi, has termed the British Shield, because I think without the British sponsorship, we wouldn’t be having this discussion today. The British sponsored Zionism for a very simple reason, which is that during World War I, the Ottoman armies attempted to march on the Suez Canal.
In the Palestinian case, their opposition to Jewish immigration was to prevent the transformation of their homeland into a Jewish state that would dispossess them, and I think that’s an important distinction to make. The other point I wanted to make is we’ve spent the past several hours talking about Zionism, transfer, and so on, but I think there’s a more fundamental aspect to this, which is that Zionism, I think, would have emerged and disappeared as yet one more utopian political project had it not been for the British, what the preeminent Palestinian historian, Walid Khalidi, has termed the British Shield, because I think without the British sponsorship, we wouldn’t be having this discussion today. The British sponsored Zionism for a very simple reason, which is that during World War I, the Ottoman armies attempted to march on the Suez Canal.
Suez Canal was the jugular vein of the British Empire between Europe and India, and the British came to the conclusion that they needed to secure the Suez Canal from any threat. And as the British have done so often in so many places, how do you deal with this? Well, you bring in a foreign minority, implant them amongst a hostile population, and establish a protectorate over them. I don’t think a Jewish state in Palestine had been part of British intentions, and the Balfour Declaration very specifically speaks about a Jewish national home in Palestine, in other words, a British protectorate. Things ended up taking a different course, and I think the most important development was World War II, and I think this had maybe less to do with the Holocaust and more to do with the effective bankruptcy of the United Kingdom during that war, and its inability to sustain its global empire.
It ended up giving up India, ended up giving up Palestine, and it’s in that context, I think, that we need to see the emergence of a Jewish state in Palestine, and again, a Jewish state means a state in which the Jewish community enjoys not only a demographic majority, but an uncontestable demographic majority, an uncontestable territorial hegemony, and uncontestable political supremacy. And that is also why after 1948, the nascent Israeli state confiscated, I believe, up to 90% of lands that had been previously owned by Palestinians who became citizens of Israel.
It is why the new Israeli state imposed a military government on its population of Palestinian citizens between 1948 and 1966. It is why the Israeli state effectively reduced the Palestinians living within the Israeli state, as citizens of the Israeli state, to second class citizens, on the one hand, promoting Jewish nationalism and Jewish nationalist parties, on the other hand, doing everything within its power to suppress and eliminate Palestinian or Arab nationalist movements. And that’s why today there’s a consensus among all major human rights organizations that Israel is an apartheid state, what the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem describes a regime of Jewish supremacy between the river and the sea.
Lex Fridman
You’re
You’re
Lex Fridman
Really tempting a response from the other side on the last few sentences. We’ll talk-
Really tempting a response from the other side on the last few sentences. We’ll talk-
Benny Morris
Propaganda, yeah, okay.
Propaganda, yeah, okay.
Lex Fridman
We’ll talk about the claims of apartheid and so on. It’s a fascinating discussion, we need to have it. Norm.
We’ll talk about the claims of apartheid and so on. It’s a fascinating discussion, we need to have it. Norm.
Norman Finkelstein
On the question of the responsibility of the Palestinian Arabs for the Nazi Holocaust, direct or indirect, I consider that an absurd claim, as [inaudible 01:46:46] said, and I quoted him, “The entire Western world turned its back on the Jews to somehow focus on the Palestinians,” it strikes me as completely ridiculous. Number two, as Mouin said, there’s a perfectly understandable reason why Palestinian Arabs wouldn’t want Jews because in their minds, and not irrationally, these Jews intended to create a Jewish state, which would quite likely have resulted in their expulsion. I’m a very generous person. I’ve actually taken in a homeless person for two and a half years, but if I knew in advance that that homeless person was going to try to turn me out of my apartment, I would think 10,000 times before I took him in.
On the question of the responsibility of the Palestinian Arabs for the Nazi Holocaust, direct or indirect, I consider that an absurd claim, as [inaudible 01:46:46] said, and I quoted him, “The entire Western world turned its back on the Jews to somehow focus on the Palestinians,” it strikes me as completely ridiculous. Number two, as Mouin said, there’s a perfectly understandable reason why Palestinian Arabs wouldn’t want Jews because in their minds, and not irrationally, these Jews intended to create a Jewish state, which would quite likely have resulted in their expulsion. I’m a very generous person. I’ve actually taken in a homeless person for two and a half years, but if I knew in advance that that homeless person was going to try to turn me out of my apartment, I would think 10,000 times before I took him in.
As far as the actual complicity of the Palestinian Arabs, if you look at Raul Hilberg’s three volume classic work, The Destruction of the European Jury, he has in those 1,000+ pages, one sentence on the role of the mufti of Jerusalem, and that I think is probably an overstatement, but we’ll leave it aside. The only two points I would make aside from the Holocaust point is number one, I do think the transfer discussion is useful because it indicates that there was a rational reason behind the Arab resistance to Jewish or Zionist immigration to Palestine, the fear of territorial displacement and dispossession.
And number two, there are two issues. One is the history, and the second is being responsible for your words. Now, some people accuse me of speaking very slowly, and they’re advised on YouTube to turn up the speed twice to three times whenever I’m on. One of the reasons I speak slowly is because I attach value to every word I say, and it is discomforting, disorienting, where you have a person who’s produced a voluminous corpus, rich in insights, and rich in archival sources who seems to disown each and every word that you pluck from that corpus by claiming that it’s either out of context or it’s cherry-picking. Words count, and I agree with Lex, everybody has the right to rescind what they’ve said in the past, but what you cannot claim is that you didn’t say what you said.
Benny Morris
I’ll stick to the history, not the current propaganda. 1917, the Zionist movement began way before the British supported the Zionist movement for decades. In 1917, the British jumped in and issued the Balfour Declaration supporting the emergence of a Jewish national home in Palestine, which most people understood to mean eventual Jewish statehood in Palestine. Most people understood that in Britain and among the Zionists and among the Arabs, but the British declared the Balfour Declaration or issued the Balfour Declaration, not only because of imperial self-interest, and this is what you’re basically saying, they had the imperial interests, a buffer state which would protect the Suez Canal from the East. The British also were motivated by idealism, and this incidentally is how Balfour described the reasoning behind issuing the declaration. And he said, “The Western world, Western Christendom owes the Jews a great debt,” both for giving the world and the West, if you like, social values as embodied in the Bible, social justice and all sorts of other things.
I’ll stick to the history, not the current propaganda. 1917, the Zionist movement began way before the British supported the Zionist movement for decades. In 1917, the British jumped in and issued the Balfour Declaration supporting the emergence of a Jewish national home in Palestine, which most people understood to mean eventual Jewish statehood in Palestine. Most people understood that in Britain and among the Zionists and among the Arabs, but the British declared the Balfour Declaration or issued the Balfour Declaration, not only because of imperial self-interest, and this is what you’re basically saying, they had the imperial interests, a buffer state which would protect the Suez Canal from the East. The British also were motivated by idealism, and this incidentally is how Balfour described the reasoning behind issuing the declaration. And he said, “The Western world, Western Christendom owes the Jews a great debt,” both for giving the world and the West, if you like, social values as embodied in the Bible, social justice and all sorts of other things.
And the Christian world owes the Jews because it persecuted them for 2,000 years. This debt we’re now beginning to repay with the 1917 declaration favoring Zionism, but it’s also worth remembering that the Jews weren’t proxies or attached to the British imperial endeavor. They were happy to receive British support in 1917 and then subsequently when the British ruled Palestine for 20, 30 years, but they weren’t part of the British imperial design or mission. They wanted a state for themselves. The Jews happy to have the British support them, happy to date to have the Americans support Israel, but it’s not because we’re stooges or extensions of American imperial interests. The British incidentally always described in Arab narratives of propaganda as consistent supporters of Zionism, they weren’t. The first British rulers in Palestine, 1917, 1920-
Mouin Rabbani
Herbert Samuel.
Herbert Samuel.
Benny Morris
No, before Herbert Samuel. Samuel came in 1920. The British ruled there for three years previously, and most of the leaders, the British generals and so on who were in Palestine were anti-Zionists. And subsequently, in the ’20s and ’30s, the British occasionally curbed Zionist immigration to Palestine, and in 1939 switched horses and supported the Arab National Movement and not Zionism. They turned anti-Zionist and basically said, “You Arabs will rule Palestine within the next 10 years. This is what we’re giving you by limiting Jewish immigration to Palestine,” but the Arabs didn’t actually understand what they were being given on the silver platter Husseini again, and he said, “No, no, we can’t accept the British White Paper of May 1939, which had given the Arabs everything they wanted basically, self- determination in an Arab majority state. So, what I’m saying is the British at some point did support the Zionist enterprise, but at other points were less consistent in the support. And in 1939 until 1948, when they didn’t vote even for partition for Jewish statehood in Palestine in the UN resolution, they didn’t support Zionism during the last decade of the mandate. It’s worth remembering that.
No, before Herbert Samuel. Samuel came in 1920. The British ruled there for three years previously, and most of the leaders, the British generals and so on who were in Palestine were anti-Zionists. And subsequently, in the ’20s and ’30s, the British occasionally curbed Zionist immigration to Palestine, and in 1939 switched horses and supported the Arab National Movement and not Zionism. They turned anti-Zionist and basically said, “You Arabs will rule Palestine within the next 10 years. This is what we’re giving you by limiting Jewish immigration to Palestine,” but the Arabs didn’t actually understand what they were being given on the silver platter Husseini again, and he said, “No, no, we can’t accept the British White Paper of May 1939, which had given the Arabs everything they wanted basically, self- determination in an Arab majority state. So, what I’m saying is the British at some point did support the Zionist enterprise, but at other points were less consistent in the support. And in 1939 until 1948, when they didn’t vote even for partition for Jewish statehood in Palestine in the UN resolution, they didn’t support Zionism during the last decade of the mandate. It’s worth remembering that.
Mouin Rabbani
I’d like to respond to that. Speaking of propaganda, I find it simply impossible to accept that Balfour, who as British Prime Minister in 1905, was a chief sponsor of the Aliens Act, which was specifically-
I’d like to respond to that. Speaking of propaganda, I find it simply impossible to accept that Balfour, who as British Prime Minister in 1905, was a chief sponsor of the Aliens Act, which was specifically-
Benny Morris
He changed his mind.
He changed his mind.
Mouin Rabbani
… Which was specifically designed to keep persecuted Eastern European Jews out of the streets of the UK and who was denounced as an antisemite by the entire British Jewish establishment. A decade later, all of a sudden-
… Which was specifically designed to keep persecuted Eastern European Jews out of the streets of the UK and who was denounced as an antisemite by the entire British Jewish establishment. A decade later, all of a sudden-
Benny Morris
Changed his mind.
Changed his mind.
Mouin Rabbani
People changed their minds, but when the changing of the mind just coincidentally happens to coincide with the British imperial interest, I think perhaps the transformation is a little more superficial than he’s being given credit for. It was clearly a British imperial venture, and if there had been no threat to the Suez Canal during World War I, regardless of what Balfour would’ve thought about the Jews and their contribution to history and their persecution and so on, there would’ve been no Balfour Declaration.
People changed their minds, but when the changing of the mind just coincidentally happens to coincide with the British imperial interest, I think perhaps the transformation is a little more superficial than he’s being given credit for. It was clearly a British imperial venture, and if there had been no threat to the Suez Canal during World War I, regardless of what Balfour would’ve thought about the Jews and their contribution to history and their persecution and so on, there would’ve been no Balfour Declaration.
Steven Bonnell
May I ask real quick, it’s a question on that, why did the British ever cap immigration then from Jews to that area at all?
May I ask real quick, it’s a question on that, why did the British ever cap immigration then from Jews to that area at all?
Mouin Rabbani
Well, we’re talking now about 19-
Well, we’re talking now about 19-
Benny Morris
20s and 30s.
20s and 30s.
Steven Bonnell
But I’m saying that if the whole goal was just to be an imperialist project, there were terrorist attacks from Jewish-
But I’m saying that if the whole goal was just to be an imperialist project, there were terrorist attacks from Jewish-
Mouin Rabbani
Yes, but you’re… I’ll answer you.
Yes, but you’re… I’ll answer you.
Steven Bonnell
In the ’40s.
In the ’40s.
Mouin Rabbani
And we’re talking now about 1917, and as I mentioned earlier, I don’t think the British had a Jewish state in mind. That’s why they used the term Jewish national home. I think what they wanted was a British protectorate, loyal to and dependent upon the British. I think an outstanding review of British policy towards these issues during the mandate has been done by Martin Bunton of the University of Victoria, and he basically makes the argument that once the British realized the mess they were in, certainly by the late ’20s, early ’30s, they recognized the mess they were in, the irreconcilable differences, and basically pursued a policy of just muddling on, and muddling on in the context of British rule in Palestine, whose overall purpose was to serve for the development of Zionist institutions, Yishuv’s economy and so on, meant even if the British were not self-consciously doing this, preparing the groundwork for the eventual establishment of the Jewish state. I don’t know if that answers your question.
And we’re talking now about 1917, and as I mentioned earlier, I don’t think the British had a Jewish state in mind. That’s why they used the term Jewish national home. I think what they wanted was a British protectorate, loyal to and dependent upon the British. I think an outstanding review of British policy towards these issues during the mandate has been done by Martin Bunton of the University of Victoria, and he basically makes the argument that once the British realized the mess they were in, certainly by the late ’20s, early ’30s, they recognized the mess they were in, the irreconcilable differences, and basically pursued a policy of just muddling on, and muddling on in the context of British rule in Palestine, whose overall purpose was to serve for the development of Zionist institutions, Yishuv’s economy and so on, meant even if the British were not self-consciously doing this, preparing the groundwork for the eventual establishment of the Jewish state. I don’t know if that answers your question.
Benny Morris
Except they did turn anti-Zionist in 1939.
Except they did turn anti-Zionist in 1939.
Mouin Rabbani
Yes, of course [inaudible 01:56:30].
Yes, of course [inaudible 01:56:30].
Benny Morris
And maintained-
And maintained-
Mouin Rabbani
They were being shot off by [inaudible 01:56:33]-
They were being shot off by [inaudible 01:56:33]-
Benny Morris
… That Zionist… No, no, before they were being shot off, but maintain that anti-Zionist posture until 1948.
… That Zionist… No, no, before they were being shot off, but maintain that anti-Zionist posture until 1948.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay.
Okay.
Mouin Rabbani
And if I may, just also one point, you mentioned Hajj Amin al-Husseini during World… Entirely legitimate, but what I would also point out is that you had a Zionist organization, the Lehi-
And if I may, just also one point, you mentioned Hajj Amin al-Husseini during World… Entirely legitimate, but what I would also point out is that you had a Zionist organization, the Lehi-
Benny Morris
300 people.
300 people.
Mouin Rabbani
300 people, one of whom happened to become an Israeli prime minister, an Israeli foreign minister, a speaker of Israeli parliament-
300 people, one of whom happened to become an Israeli prime minister, an Israeli foreign minister, a speaker of Israeli parliament-
Norman Finkelstein
Maybe you should give his name.
Maybe you should give his name.
Mouin Rabbani
Yitzhak Shamir proposing an alliance with Nazi Germany in 1941.
Yitzhak Shamir proposing an alliance with Nazi Germany in 1941.
Benny Morris
Shamir proposed a Nazi-
Shamir proposed a Nazi-
Mouin Rabbani
Well, no, the Lehi proposed-
Well, no, the Lehi proposed-
Benny Morris
Some people in the Lehi proposed-
Some people in the Lehi proposed-
Mouin Rabbani
Of which Shamir was a prominent leader.
Of which Shamir was a prominent leader.
Benny Morris
This is a red herring also.
This is a red herring also.
Mouin Rabbani
No, no. Well, if he’s a red herring, Hajj Amin al-Husseini is a red whale, I’m sorry.
No, no. Well, if he’s a red herring, Hajj Amin al-Husseini is a red whale, I’m sorry.
Benny Morris
The Lehi was an unimportant organization in the Yishuv. 300 people versus 30,000 belonged to the Haganah, so it was not a very important organization. It’s true, before the Holocaust actually began, they wanted allies against the British where they could find them and they-
The Lehi was an unimportant organization in the Yishuv. 300 people versus 30,000 belonged to the Haganah, so it was not a very important organization. It’s true, before the Holocaust actually began, they wanted allies against the British where they could find them and they-
Mouin Rabbani
We’re talking 1941 here, not 1931.
We’re talking 1941 here, not 1931.
Benny Morris
1940.
1940.
Mouin Rabbani
’41 from what I recall.
’41 from what I recall.
Benny Morris
1940, they approached the German emissary in Istanbul or something.
1940, they approached the German emissary in Istanbul or something.
Mouin Rabbani
And if I may, proposed an alliance with Nazi Germany on what the Lehi described as on the basis of shared ideological principles.
And if I may, proposed an alliance with Nazi Germany on what the Lehi described as on the basis of shared ideological principles.
Benny Morris
They didn’t share ideological-
They didn’t share ideological-
Mouin Rabbani
Well, they said they did.
Well, they said they did.
Norman Finkelstein
They said it.
They said it.
Benny Morris
They did revile-
They did revile-
Norman Finkelstein
Why are you doing these things? Of course, they said that.
Why are you doing these things? Of course, they said that.
Benny Morris
The Lehi was reviled by the majority-
The Lehi was reviled by the majority-
Norman Finkelstein
You know the state, but you know the-
You know the state, but you know the-
Benny Morris
The Lehi was reviled.
The Lehi was reviled.
Norman Finkelstein
You know what the statement said on the basis of a shared ideology. Why do you say no?
You know what the statement said on the basis of a shared ideology. Why do you say no?
Benny Morris
The Lehi people were Nazi, that you say?
The Lehi people were Nazi, that you say?
Norman Finkelstein
I’m saying that they said-
I’m saying that they said-
Benny Morris
No, you’re saying that. Forget statements, you like to quote things, but where they-
No, you’re saying that. Forget statements, you like to quote things, but where they-
Norman Finkelstein
I do like to quote things, it’s called facts.
I do like to quote things, it’s called facts.
Benny Morris
Where are the Lehi Nazis? That’s what I’m asking.
Where are the Lehi Nazis? That’s what I’m asking.
Norman Finkelstein
What did he just say?
What did he just say?
Benny Morris
Some of them supported Stalin, incidentally.
Some of them supported Stalin, incidentally.
Norman Finkelstein
He’s saying that the basis of the pact was there agreement on ideology.
He’s saying that the basis of the pact was there agreement on ideology.
Benny Morris
There wasn’t any pact. They suggested, they proposed an agreement.
There wasn’t any pact. They suggested, they proposed an agreement.
Norman Finkelstein
Right, and what did the agreement say?
Right, and what did the agreement say?
Benny Morris
They wanted arms against the British, that’s what they wanted.
They wanted arms against the British, that’s what they wanted.
Norman Finkelstein
What did the agreement say?
What did the agreement say?
Mouin Rabbani
Well, that’s what Hajj Amin al-Husseini wanted also. That’s what-
Well, that’s what Hajj Amin al-Husseini wanted also. That’s what-
Benny Morris
No, no, but they didn’t-
No, no, but they didn’t-
Mouin Rabbani
… Others in India-
… Others in India-
Benny Morris
Lehi people didn’t work in Berlin helping the Nazi regime.
Lehi people didn’t work in Berlin helping the Nazi regime.
Mouin Rabbani
It’s what the IRA wanted also.
It’s what the IRA wanted also.
Benny Morris
No, but this is what Hajj Amin al-Husseini did. You know that he was an antisemite. You’ve probably read some of his works. He wasn’t just anti-British.
No, but this is what Hajj Amin al-Husseini did. You know that he was an antisemite. You’ve probably read some of his works. He wasn’t just anti-British.
Mouin Rabbani
Yes, and-
Yes, and-
Benny Morris
He was also antisemitic. He had a common ground with Hitler. It’s as simple as that.
He was also antisemitic. He had a common ground with Hitler. It’s as simple as that.
Mouin Rabbani
I think we can agree-
I think we can agree-
Norman Finkelstein
Not every antisemite is a Hitlerite.
Not every antisemite is a Hitlerite.
Mouin Rabbani
I think we could-
I think we could-
Norman Finkelstein
That part-
That part-
Steven Bonnell
He literally worked with the Nazis to recruit people. He wasn’t just a guy posting or-
He literally worked with the Nazis to recruit people. He wasn’t just a guy posting or-
Norman Finkelstein
And he was an absolutely revolting, disgusting human being-
And he was an absolutely revolting, disgusting human being-
Benny Morris
There’s something happening here.
There’s something happening here.
Steven Bonnell
But the problem is you’re saying that Husseini was his influence… You’re saying the move [inaudible 01:59:28]-
But the problem is you’re saying that Husseini was his influence… You’re saying the move [inaudible 01:59:28]-
Norman Finkelstein
I don’t even understand, of all the crimes you want to ascribe to the Palestinian people, trying to blame them directly-indirectly, indirectly, or indirectly, three times the move for the Nazi Holocaust is completely lunatic.
I don’t even understand, of all the crimes you want to ascribe to the Palestinian people, trying to blame them directly-indirectly, indirectly, or indirectly, three times the move for the Nazi Holocaust is completely lunatic.
Steven Bonnell
Hold on. Wait, he’s not blaming them for the Holocaust. He’s saying that from the perspective-
Hold on. Wait, he’s not blaming them for the Holocaust. He’s saying that from the perspective-
Norman Finkelstein
Of course he-
Of course he-
Benny Morris
No, no, no.
No, no, no.
Steven Bonnell
Wait, wait, wait, no, he’s saying that from the perspective of Jews in the region, Palestinians would’ve been part of the-
Wait, wait, wait, no, he’s saying that from the perspective of Jews in the region, Palestinians would’ve been part of the-
Norman Finkelstein
That’s not what he’s saying.
That’s not what he’s saying.
Steven Bonnell
That is exactly what he said.
That is exactly what he said.
Norman Finkelstein
You have not read him. I’ve read him.
You have not read him. I’ve read him.
Steven Bonnell
You’ve read him and you don’t understand him.
You’ve read him and you don’t understand him.
Norman Finkelstein
You’ve read-
You’ve read-
Steven Bonnell
He’s right here.
He’s right here.
Norman Finkelstein
Believe me, I’m a lot more literate than you, Mr. Barelli.
Believe me, I’m a lot more literate than you, Mr. Barelli.
Steven Bonnell
I’m going to believe the guy that wrote the stuff.
I’m going to believe the guy that wrote the stuff.
Norman Finkelstein
You read what Wikipedia said.
You read what Wikipedia said.
Steven Bonnell
That’s great, and you don’t even speak Hebrew and you call yourself an Israeli historian.
That’s great, and you don’t even speak Hebrew and you call yourself an Israeli historian.
Norman Finkelstein
[inaudible 02:00:11].
[inaudible 02:00:11].
Steven Bonnell
[inaudible 02:00:10] different grounds.
[inaudible 02:00:10] different grounds.
Mouin Rabbani
If I can just respond to you-
If I can just respond to you-
Steven Bonnell
No, no, I’m just saying that there were two tricks-
No, no, I’m just saying that there were two tricks-
Norman Finkelstein
You said nothing, as you always do.
You said nothing, as you always do.
Steven Bonnell
That’s fine. There were two tricks that are being played here that I think is interesting. One is, you guys claim that the Lehi was trying to forge an alliance with Nazi Germany because of a shared ideology.
That’s fine. There were two tricks that are being played here that I think is interesting. One is, you guys claim that the Lehi was trying to forge an alliance with Nazi Germany because of a shared ideology.
Mouin Rabbani
That’s what they said.
That’s what they said.
Steven Bonnell
Yeah, but hold on. No, no, no, no, wait, wait, wait, no, no, it’s about what you said. You brought that up to imply that Zionism must be inexorably linked-
Yeah, but hold on. No, no, no, no, wait, wait, wait, no, no, it’s about what you said. You brought that up to imply that Zionism must be inexorably linked-
Norman Finkelstein
That’s a fact.
That’s a fact.
Mouin Rabbani
I’m sorry. No, you’re putting words in my mouth.
I’m sorry. No, you’re putting words in my mouth.
Steven Bonnell
Wait. Well, then what was the purpose of saying that the Lehi claimed that… The Lehi, who were a small group of people that were reviled by many in Israel [inaudible 02:00:44]-
Wait. Well, then what was the purpose of saying that the Lehi claimed that… The Lehi, who were a small group of people that were reviled by many in Israel [inaudible 02:00:44]-
Benny Morris
Not many, by everybody practically. They were called terrorists.
Not many, by everybody practically. They were called terrorists.
Steven Bonnell
[inaudible 02:00:47].
[inaudible 02:00:47].
Benny Morris
The Zionist movement called them terrorists.
The Zionist movement called them terrorists.
Mouin Rabbani
Yes and [inaudible 02:00:51]-
Yes and [inaudible 02:00:51]-
Benny Morris
And hunted them.
And hunted them.
Steven Bonnell
[inaudible 02:00:52] shared ideology come?
[inaudible 02:00:52] shared ideology come?
Mouin Rabbani
Shamir called himself a terrorist. They were so irrelevant that their leader ended up being kicked upstairs to the leader of the Israeli parliament-
Shamir called himself a terrorist. They were so irrelevant that their leader ended up being kicked upstairs to the leader of the Israeli parliament-
Benny Morris
That’s Israeli [inaudible 02:01:02] in.
That’s Israeli [inaudible 02:01:02] in.
Mouin Rabbani
… To Israeli foreign minister-
… To Israeli foreign minister-
Steven Bonnell
And Begin was also a part-
And Begin was also a part-
Mouin Rabbani
Yes, you want to characterize him as irrelevant as well, go ahead.
Yes, you want to characterize him as irrelevant as well, go ahead.
Steven Bonnell
No, characterize him as relevant or irrelevant based on what happens decades later. The timeline matters. The question is, what is the point of saying that the Lehi tried to forge an alliance with Nazi Germany based on [inaudible 02:01:19]?
No, characterize him as relevant or irrelevant based on what happens decades later. The timeline matters. The question is, what is the point of saying that the Lehi tried to forge an alliance with Nazi Germany based on [inaudible 02:01:19]?
Norman Finkelstein
[inaudible 02:01:19] the fact that it’s relevant is bringing up the mufti of Jerusalem and trying to blame the Holocaust [inaudible 02:01:25]-
[inaudible 02:01:19] the fact that it’s relevant is bringing up the mufti of Jerusalem and trying to blame the Holocaust [inaudible 02:01:25]-
Steven Bonnell
No one [inaudible 02:01:26] Holocaust [inaudible 02:01:28].
No one [inaudible 02:01:26] Holocaust [inaudible 02:01:28].
Benny Morris
The mufti was the leader of the Palestine Arab National Movement. The Lehi was 300 people.
The mufti was the leader of the Palestine Arab National Movement. The Lehi was 300 people.
Norman Finkelstein
And he had as much to do with the Nazi Holocaust as I did.
And he had as much to do with the Nazi Holocaust as I did.
Benny Morris
No, he recruited people for the SS. How can you get away from that?
No, he recruited people for the SS. How can you get away from that?
Norman Finkelstein
No, he recruited soldiers in the Balkans, mostly Kosovars, which was disgusting. I have no doubt about that, but he had one [inaudible 02:01:50]-
No, he recruited soldiers in the Balkans, mostly Kosovars, which was disgusting. I have no doubt about that, but he had one [inaudible 02:01:50]-
Benny Morris
He was [inaudible 02:01:50] plenty with the foreign ministers saying, “Don’t let the Jews out.”
He was [inaudible 02:01:50] plenty with the foreign ministers saying, “Don’t let the Jews out.”
Norman Finkelstein
[inaudible 02:01:54].
[inaudible 02:01:54].
Mouin Rabbani
Can I say-
Can I say-
Norman Finkelstein
[inaudible 02:01:55].
[inaudible 02:01:55].
Benny Morris
The Italian foreign minister receive letters from Husseini during the Holocaust, “Don’t let the Jews out.” I’m not saying he was a major architect of the Holocaust.
The Italian foreign minister receive letters from Husseini during the Holocaust, “Don’t let the Jews out.” I’m not saying he was a major architect of the Holocaust.
Norman Finkelstein
He wasn’t even minor, one sentence.
He wasn’t even minor, one sentence.
Mouin Rabbani
If we’re agreed, that Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, collaborated with the Nazis during World War II and actively sought their sponsorship, why is it irrelevant-
If we’re agreed, that Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, collaborated with the Nazis during World War II and actively sought their sponsorship, why is it irrelevant-
Benny Morris
And probably wanted the destruction of European jury.
And probably wanted the destruction of European jury.
Mouin Rabbani
He probably wanted a lot of things.
He probably wanted a lot of things.
Benny Morris
Okay.
Okay.
Mouin Rabbani
If that’s relevant, why is it irrelevant that a prime minister of Israel-
If that’s relevant, why is it irrelevant that a prime minister of Israel-
Benny Morris
Not prime minister. In 1941, he wasn’t prime minister of Israel. He was a leader of a very small terrorist group.
Not prime minister. In 1941, he wasn’t prime minister of Israel. He was a leader of a very small terrorist group.
Mouin Rabbani
So do you contend-
So do you contend-
Benny Morris
Denounced as terrorist by the mainstream of Zionism.
Denounced as terrorist by the mainstream of Zionism.
Mouin Rabbani
Do you consider it irrelevant that many years ago, Mahmoud Abbas wrote a doctoral thesis, which is basically tantamount-
Do you consider it irrelevant that many years ago, Mahmoud Abbas wrote a doctoral thesis, which is basically tantamount-
Benny Morris
Show me something about Mahmoud Abbas, but I didn’t bring it up, you’re the one who’s bringing it up.
Show me something about Mahmoud Abbas, but I didn’t bring it up, you’re the one who’s bringing it up.
Mouin Rabbani
Yes, do you consider that [inaudible 02:02:58]-
Yes, do you consider that [inaudible 02:02:58]-
Benny Morris
Belittling the Holocaust, that’s what you’re saying. The president of the Palestinian National Authority belittled the Holocaust saying it didn’t happen, or only a few Jews died.
Belittling the Holocaust, that’s what you’re saying. The president of the Palestinian National Authority belittled the Holocaust saying it didn’t happen, or only a few Jews died.
Mouin Rabbani
I think that’s a fair characterization of Mahmoud Abbas.
I think that’s a fair characterization of Mahmoud Abbas.
Benny Morris
But I didn’t bring it up.
But I didn’t bring it up.
Mouin Rabbani
I brought it up because my question is, then why is Shamir’s antecedence irrelevant?
I brought it up because my question is, then why is Shamir’s antecedence irrelevant?
Benny Morris
He was a terrorist leader of a very small, marginal group-
He was a terrorist leader of a very small, marginal group-
Mouin Rabbani
Who became-
Who became-
Benny Morris
Hajj Amin al-Husseini was the head of the movement at the time. There’s no comparison.
Hajj Amin al-Husseini was the head of the movement at the time. There’s no comparison.
Steven Bonnell
Also, the point of bringing Husseini-
Also, the point of bringing Husseini-
Mouin Rabbani
There’s no-
There’s no-
Steven Bonnell
The point of bringing up Husseini’s stuff wasn’t to say that he was a great further of the Holocaust, it’s that he might’ve been a great further in the prevention of Jews fleeing to go to Palestine to escape the Holocaust.
The point of bringing up Husseini’s stuff wasn’t to say that he was a great further of the Holocaust, it’s that he might’ve been a great further in the prevention of Jews fleeing to go to Palestine to escape the Holocaust.
Mouin Rabbani
Yes, but the point I made-
Yes, but the point I made-
Steven Bonnell
That was the point.
That was the point.
Mouin Rabbani
And I explained why I think that’s not an entirely accurate characterization. And then I wanted to make another point, if it’s legitimate to bring up his role during World War II, why is it illegitimate to bring up a man who would become Israel’s speaker of parliament, foreign minister? And also-
And I explained why I think that’s not an entirely accurate characterization. And then I wanted to make another point, if it’s legitimate to bring up his role during World War II, why is it illegitimate to bring up a man who would become Israel’s speaker of parliament, foreign minister? And also-
Benny Morris
He was a young terrorist.
He was a young terrorist.
Mouin Rabbani
And was also responsible for the murder of the United Nations’ first international envoy, Folke Bernadotte, why is all that irrelevant? I don’t understand.
And was also responsible for the murder of the United Nations’ first international envoy, Folke Bernadotte, why is all that irrelevant? I don’t understand.
Steven Bonnell
I think that the reason why he was brought up was because Jewish people in this time period would’ve viewed it as there was a prevention of Jews leaving Europe because of the Palestinians pressuring the British to put a curb that 75,000 immigration limit, yes, but it’s not about them furthering the Holocaust or being an architect, major, minor player in the Holocaust. He was a major player in that region, so if you wanted to bring up-
I think that the reason why he was brought up was because Jewish people in this time period would’ve viewed it as there was a prevention of Jews leaving Europe because of the Palestinians pressuring the British to put a curb that 75,000 immigration limit, yes, but it’s not about them furthering the Holocaust or being an architect, major, minor player in the Holocaust. He was a major player in that region, so if you wanted to bring up-
Mouin Rabbani
Benny Morris made the specific claim that the Palestinians played an indirect role in the Holocaust.
Benny Morris made the specific claim that the Palestinians played an indirect role in the Holocaust.
Steven Bonnell
The indirect role would’ve been the prevention of people escaping from Europe.
The indirect role would’ve been the prevention of people escaping from Europe.
Mouin Rabbani
Yes, and my response to that is, first of all, I disagree with that characterization, but second of all-
Yes, and my response to that is, first of all, I disagree with that characterization, but second of all-
Benny Morris
How can you disagree with that? They forced the British to prevent immigration of Jews from Europe and reaching safe shores in Palestine. That’s what they did, and they knew that the Jews were being persecuted in Europe.
How can you disagree with that? They forced the British to prevent immigration of Jews from Europe and reaching safe shores in Palestine. That’s what they did, and they knew that the Jews were being persecuted in Europe.
Mouin Rabbani
Was Palestine the only spot of land on Earth?
Was Palestine the only spot of land on Earth?
Benny Morris
Yes, basically that was the problem. The Jews couldn’t immigrate anywhere else.
Yes, basically that was the problem. The Jews couldn’t immigrate anywhere else.
Mouin Rabbani
What about your great friends in Britain, the architects of the Balfour Declaration?
What about your great friends in Britain, the architects of the Balfour Declaration?
Benny Morris
By the late 1930s, they weren’t-
By the late 1930s, they weren’t-
Mouin Rabbani
What about the United States?
What about the United States?
Benny Morris
… Happy to take in Jews and the Americans weren’t happy to take in Jews.
… Happy to take in Jews and the Americans weren’t happy to take in Jews.
Mouin Rabbani
And why are Palestinians, who were not Europeans, who had zero role in the rise of Nazism, who had no relation to any of this, why are they somehow uniquely responsible for what happened in Europe and uniquely culpable?
And why are Palestinians, who were not Europeans, who had zero role in the rise of Nazism, who had no relation to any of this, why are they somehow uniquely responsible for what happened in Europe and uniquely culpable?
Benny Morris
[inaudible 02:05:41] the only safe haven for Jews, that’s all.
[inaudible 02:05:41] the only safe haven for Jews, that’s all.
Norman Finkelstein
Oh, really? The United States wasn’t a potential safe haven? The only one was Palestine.
Oh, really? The United States wasn’t a potential safe haven? The only one was Palestine.
Benny Morris
At the time.
At the time.
Norman Finkelstein
The United States had no room from the Atlantic to the Pacific for Jews?
The United States had no room from the Atlantic to the Pacific for Jews?
Benny Morris
It did have room, but it didn’t want Jews.
It did have room, but it didn’t want Jews.
Norman Finkelstein
So, that wasn’t the only safe haven.
So, that wasn’t the only safe haven.
Mouin Rabbani
Shouldn’t you be focusing your anger and outrage-
Shouldn’t you be focusing your anger and outrage-
Benny Morris
America should be blamed for not letting Jews in during the ’30s and ’40s.
America should be blamed for not letting Jews in during the ’30s and ’40s.
Norman Finkelstein
They are blamed, but nobody blames them for the Holocaust.
They are blamed, but nobody blames them for the Holocaust.
Benny Morris
Well, indirectly-
Well, indirectly-
Norman Finkelstein
I’ve never heard it said that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was indirectly responsible for the Holocaust. I never heard that. Now, maybe it’s in Israeli literature because the Israelis have gone mad. Yes, your prime minister said the whole idea of the gas chambers came from the mufti of Jerusalem.
I’ve never heard it said that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was indirectly responsible for the Holocaust. I never heard that. Now, maybe it’s in Israeli literature because the Israelis have gone mad. Yes, your prime minister said the whole idea of the gas chambers came from the mufti of Jerusalem.
Benny Morris
That’s nonsense. We all know that’s nonsense.
That’s nonsense. We all know that’s nonsense.
Norman Finkelstein
But we also know that Netanyahu said it.
But we also know that Netanyahu said it.
Benny Morris
Netanyahu says so many things, which are absurd [inaudible 02:06:36]-
Netanyahu says so many things, which are absurd [inaudible 02:06:36]-
Norman Finkelstein
And he happens to be the prime minister [inaudible 02:06:38]-
And he happens to be the prime minister [inaudible 02:06:38]-
Mouin Rabbani
[inaudible 02:06:38] serving prime minister of Israel.
[inaudible 02:06:38] serving prime minister of Israel.
Benny Morris
I can’t be responsible-
I can’t be responsible-
Mouin Rabbani
You’re not responsible for them, but it is relevant that he’s the longest serving prime minister of Israel.
You’re not responsible for them, but it is relevant that he’s the longest serving prime minister of Israel.
Benny Morris
Unfortunately, it says something about the Israeli public, I agree.
Unfortunately, it says something about the Israeli public, I agree.
Mouin Rabbani
Yes, and he gets elected, not despite saying such things, but because he says such.
Yes, and he gets elected, not despite saying such things, but because he says such.
Benny Morris
His voters don’t care about Hajj Amin al-Husseini or Hitler, they know nothing about…
His voters don’t care about Hajj Amin al-Husseini or Hitler, they know nothing about…
Mouin Rabbani
They will be [inaudible 02:07:00].
They will be [inaudible 02:07:00].
Benny Morris
His base know nothing about anything, and he can say what he likes and they’ll say yes, or they don’t care if he says these things.
His base know nothing about anything, and he can say what he likes and they’ll say yes, or they don’t care if he says these things.
Mouin Rabbani
You may well be right, but anyway, not to beat a dead horse, but I still don’t understand-
You may well be right, but anyway, not to beat a dead horse, but I still don’t understand-
Benny Morris
Let’s not beat a dead horse, you’re right.
Let’s not beat a dead horse, you’re right.
Mouin Rabbani
I’ll just conclude by saying I don’t understand why the Mufti of Jerusalem is relevant-
I’ll just conclude by saying I don’t understand why the Mufti of Jerusalem is relevant-
Benny Morris
He is relevant, but-
He is relevant, but-
Benny Morris
The head of the national-
The head of the national-
Mouin Rabbani
… Yitzhak Shamir is not relevant?
… Yitzhak Shamir is not relevant?
Benny Morris
Shamir wasn’t the head of the national movement. He represented 100 or 200 or 300 gunmen who were considered terrorists by the Zionist movement at the time. The fact that 30 years later he becomes prime minister, that’s the crux of history.
Shamir wasn’t the head of the national movement. He represented 100 or 200 or 300 gunmen who were considered terrorists by the Zionist movement at the time. The fact that 30 years later he becomes prime minister, that’s the crux of history.
Mouin Rabbani
And his history is not-
And his history is not-
Benny Morris
Hajj Amin al-Husseini was the head of the Palestine Arab National Movement at the time.
Hajj Amin al-Husseini was the head of the Palestine Arab National Movement at the time.
Mouin Rabbani
Anyway-
Anyway-
Benny Morris
What can you do?
What can you do?
Mouin Rabbani
I think we’re speaking past each other and I’ll leave it there.
I think we’re speaking past each other and I’ll leave it there.
Benny Morris
We’re not, I’m talking facts.
We’re not, I’m talking facts.
October 7
Lex Fridman
Let’s move to the modern day and we’ll return to history, maybe ’67 and other important moments, but let’s look to today, in the recent months, October 7th. Let me ask sort of a pointed question. Was October 7th attacks by Hamas on Israel genocidal? Was it an act of ethnic cleansing? Just so we lay out the moral calculus that we are engaged in, maybe-
Let’s move to the modern day and we’ll return to history, maybe ’67 and other important moments, but let’s look to today, in the recent months, October 7th. Let me ask sort of a pointed question. Was October 7th attacks by Hamas on Israel genocidal? Was it an act of ethnic cleansing? Just so we lay out the moral calculus that we are engaged in, maybe-
Benny Morris
The problem with October 7th is this, the Hamas fighters who invaded Southern Israel were sent, ordered to murder, rape, and do all the nasty things that they did, and they killed some 1,200 Israelis that day and abducted them as we know, something like 250, mostly civilians, also some soldiers, took them back to dungeons in Gaza, but they were motivated not just by the words of their current leader in the Gaza Strip, but by their ideology, which is embedded in their charter from 1988, if I remember correctly, and that charter is genocidal. It says that the Jews must be eradicated basically from the land of Israel, from Palestine. The Jews are described there as sons of apes and pigs. The Jews are a base people, killers of prophets, and they should not exist in Palestine. It doesn’t say that they necessarily should be murdered all around the world, the Hamas charter, but certainly the Jews should be eliminated from Palestine.
The problem with October 7th is this, the Hamas fighters who invaded Southern Israel were sent, ordered to murder, rape, and do all the nasty things that they did, and they killed some 1,200 Israelis that day and abducted them as we know, something like 250, mostly civilians, also some soldiers, took them back to dungeons in Gaza, but they were motivated not just by the words of their current leader in the Gaza Strip, but by their ideology, which is embedded in their charter from 1988, if I remember correctly, and that charter is genocidal. It says that the Jews must be eradicated basically from the land of Israel, from Palestine. The Jews are described there as sons of apes and pigs. The Jews are a base people, killers of prophets, and they should not exist in Palestine. It doesn’t say that they necessarily should be murdered all around the world, the Hamas charter, but certainly the Jews should be eliminated from Palestine.
And this is the driving ideology behind the massacre of the Jews on October 7th, which brought down on the Gaza Strip, and I think with the intention by the Hamas of the Israeli counter offensive because they knew that that counter offensive would result in many Palestinian dead because the Hamas fighters and their weaponry and so on were embedded in the population in Gaza, and they hoped to benefit from this in the eyes of world public opinion as Israel chased these Hamas people and their ammunition dumps and so on and killed lots of Palestinian civilians in the process. All of this was understood by Sinwar, by the head of the Hamas, and he strived for that, but initially he wanted to kill as many Jews as he could in the border areas around the Gaza Strip.
Mouin Rabbani
I’ll respond directly to the points you made, and then I’ll leave it to Norm to bring in the historical context. That Hamas charter is from the ’90s, I think?
I’ll respond directly to the points you made, and then I’ll leave it to Norm to bring in the historical context. That Hamas charter is from the ’90s, I think?
Benny Morris
1988.
1988.
Mouin Rabbani
1988, so it’s from the ’80s. I think your characterization of that charter as antisemitic is indisputable. I think your characterization of that charter as genocidal is off the mark.
1988, so it’s from the ’80s. I think your characterization of that charter as antisemitic is indisputable. I think your characterization of that charter as genocidal is off the mark.
Benny Morris
It’s implicit.
It’s implicit.
Mouin Rabbani
And more importantly, that charter has been superseded by a new charter. In fact, it has been… Well, there is-
And more importantly, that charter has been superseded by a new charter. In fact, it has been… Well, there is-
Benny Morris
There is no new charter. There is an explanation, a statement [inaudible 02:11:06]-
There is no new charter. There is an explanation, a statement [inaudible 02:11:06]-
Norman Finkelstein
2018, a political statement.
2018, a political statement.
Benny Morris
2000 and something.
2000 and something.
Norman Finkelstein
2018.
2018.
Benny Morris
2018, supposedly clarifying things which are in the charter, but it doesn’t actually step back from what the charter says, eliminate Israel, eliminate the Jews from the land of Israel.
2018, supposedly clarifying things which are in the charter, but it doesn’t actually step back from what the charter says, eliminate Israel, eliminate the Jews from the land of Israel.
Mouin Rabbani
In 2018, the Hamas charter, if we look at the current version of the charter-
In 2018, the Hamas charter, if we look at the current version of the charter-
Benny Morris
It’s not called a charter. You’re calling it a charter. It wasn’t. The only thing called the charter is what was issued in 1988 by Yassin himself.
It’s not called a charter. You’re calling it a charter. It wasn’t. The only thing called the charter is what was issued in 1988 by Yassin himself.
Mouin Rabbani
Anyway, it makes a clear distinction between Jews and Zionists in 2018. Now, you can choose to dismiss it, believe it, it’s sincere, it’s insincere, whatever-
Anyway, it makes a clear distinction between Jews and Zionists in 2018. Now, you can choose to dismiss it, believe it, it’s sincere, it’s insincere, whatever-
Benny Morris
Insincere is probably the right word.
Insincere is probably the right word.
Mouin Rabbani
Secondly, I’m really unfamiliar with fighters who consult these kinds of documents before they go on-
Secondly, I’m really unfamiliar with fighters who consult these kinds of documents before they go on-
Benny Morris
They’re brought up on this in their education system. In the kindergarten, they’re told, “Kill the Jews.” They practice with make-believe guns and uniforms when they’re five years old in the kindergartens of the Hamas-
They’re brought up on this in their education system. In the kindergarten, they’re told, “Kill the Jews.” They practice with make-believe guns and uniforms when they’re five years old in the kindergartens of the Hamas-
Mouin Rabbani
At the instruction of the commissioner-general of UNRWA, right?
At the instruction of the commissioner-general of UNRWA, right?
Benny Morris
I didn’t say that. I said the Hamas has kindergartens and summer camps in which they trained to kill Jews, children aged five and six.
I didn’t say that. I said the Hamas has kindergartens and summer camps in which they trained to kill Jews, children aged five and six.
Mouin Rabbani
Secondly, you keep saying Jews, to which I would respond-
Secondly, you keep saying Jews, to which I would respond-
Benny Morris
They use the word Jews.
They use the word Jews.
Mouin Rabbani
To which I would respond that Hamas does not have a record of deliberately targeting Jews who are not Israelis. And in fact, it also doesn’t have a record of deliberately targeting either Jews or Israelis outside Israel and Palestine, so all this talk of-
To which I would respond that Hamas does not have a record of deliberately targeting Jews who are not Israelis. And in fact, it also doesn’t have a record of deliberately targeting either Jews or Israelis outside Israel and Palestine, so all this talk of-
Benny Morris
Unlike the Hezbollah, which has started targeting Jews outside of Palestine.
Unlike the Hezbollah, which has started targeting Jews outside of Palestine.
Mouin Rabbani
We’re talking about October 7th and Hamas. If you’d also like to speak about Hezbollah, let’s get to that separately if you don’t mind. So again, genocidal, well, if that term is going to be discussed, my first response would be let’s talk about potentially genocidal actions against Israelis rather than against Jews for the reasons that I just mentioned. And again, I find this constant conflation of Jews, Israel, Zionism, to be a bit disturbing.
We’re talking about October 7th and Hamas. If you’d also like to speak about Hezbollah, let’s get to that separately if you don’t mind. So again, genocidal, well, if that term is going to be discussed, my first response would be let’s talk about potentially genocidal actions against Israelis rather than against Jews for the reasons that I just mentioned. And again, I find this constant conflation of Jews, Israel, Zionism, to be a bit disturbing.
Secondly, I think there are quite a few indications in the factual record that raise serious questions about the accusations of the genocidal intent and genocidal practice of what happened on October 7th. And my final point would be, I don’t think I should take your word for it, I don’t think you should take my word for it. I think what we need here is a proper independent international investigation, and the reason we need that-
Benny Morris
Of what?
Of what?
Mouin Rabbani
Of genocide during this conflict, whether by Palestinians on October 7th or Israel thereafter, and the reason that we need such an investigation is because Hamas is… There won’t be any hearings on what Hamas did on October 7th at the International Court of Justice because the International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide deals only with states and not with movements. I think the international criminal court, and specifically its current prosecutor, Karim Khan lacks any and all credibility. He’s been an absolute failure at his job. He’s just been sitting his backside for years on this file. And I think I would point out that Hamas has called for independent investigations of all these allegations. Israel has categorically rejected any international investigation, of course, fully supported by the United States. And I think what is required is to have credible investigations of these things because I don’t think you’re going to convince me, I don’t think I’m going to convince you, and this is two people sitting across the table from each other.
Of genocide during this conflict, whether by Palestinians on October 7th or Israel thereafter, and the reason that we need such an investigation is because Hamas is… There won’t be any hearings on what Hamas did on October 7th at the International Court of Justice because the International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide deals only with states and not with movements. I think the international criminal court, and specifically its current prosecutor, Karim Khan lacks any and all credibility. He’s been an absolute failure at his job. He’s just been sitting his backside for years on this file. And I think I would point out that Hamas has called for independent investigations of all these allegations. Israel has categorically rejected any international investigation, of course, fully supported by the United States. And I think what is required is to have credible investigations of these things because I don’t think you’re going to convince me, I don’t think I’m going to convince you, and this is two people sitting across the table from each other.
Benny Morris
No, there’s certain things you don’t even have to investigate. You know how many citizens, civilians died in the October 7th assault-
No, there’s certain things you don’t even have to investigate. You know how many citizens, civilians died in the October 7th assault-
Mouin Rabbani
Yes, but that’s not-
Yes, but that’s not-
Benny Morris
You know that there are lots of allegations of rape. I don’t know how persuaded you are of those. They did find bodies without heads, which is-
You know that there are lots of allegations of rape. I don’t know how persuaded you are of those. They did find bodies without heads, which is-
Mouin Rabbani
There were no beheadings of infants.
There were no beheadings of infants.
Benny Morris
There were some beheadings, apparently.
There were some beheadings, apparently.
Norman Finkelstein
The Israelis didn’t even claim that in the document they submitted before the ICJ. Go read what your government submitted. It never mentioned beheadings.
The Israelis didn’t even claim that in the document they submitted before the ICJ. Go read what your government submitted. It never mentioned beheadings.
Benny Morris
Well, as far as I know, there were some people who were beheaded, but-
Well, as far as I know, there were some people who were beheaded, but-
Norman Finkelstein
We could bring it up right now.
We could bring it up right now.
Benny Morris
You also deny that there were rapes there.
You also deny that there were rapes there.
Norman Finkelstein
I didn’t deny. I said I’ve not seen convincing evidence that confirms it. I’ve said that from day one, and I’ll say it today, four and a half months later.
I didn’t deny. I said I’ve not seen convincing evidence that confirms it. I’ve said that from day one, and I’ll say it today, four and a half months later.
Benny Morris
Do you know that they killed eight or 900 civilians in their assault?
Do you know that they killed eight or 900 civilians in their assault?
Norman Finkelstein
Absolutely, that seems to me indisputable.
Absolutely, that seems to me indisputable.
Benny Morris
… 900 civilians in the assault-
… 900 civilians in the assault-
Norman Finkelstein
Absolutely. That seems to me indisputable.
Absolutely. That seems to me indisputable.
Benny Morris
Oh, okay. Well, I’m glad that you’re considering something-
Oh, okay. Well, I’m glad that you’re considering something-
Norman Finkelstein
I’ve said that from day one.
I’ve said that from day one.
Steven Bonnell
Well, to be clear, you haven’t. You did a debate… I don’t remember the talk show, but you seemed to imply that there was a lot of crossfire and then it might’ve been the IDF that had killed a lot of-
Well, to be clear, you haven’t. You did a debate… I don’t remember the talk show, but you seemed to imply that there was a lot of crossfire and then it might’ve been the IDF that had killed a lot of-
Norman Finkelstein
I said that there is no question because the names were published in Haaretz. There is no question that roughly of the 1200 people killed, 800 of them were civilians-
I said that there is no question because the names were published in Haaretz. There is no question that roughly of the 1200 people killed, 800 of them were civilians-
Benny Morris
850.
850.
Norman Finkelstein
850, fine. So I never said that, but then I said, “No, we don’t know exactly how they were killed.” But 800 civilians killed, no, 850, no question there. And I also said on repeated occasions, there cannot be any doubt, in my opinion as of now with the available evidence, that Hamas was responsible for significant atrocities, and I made sure to include the plural.
850, fine. So I never said that, but then I said, “No, we don’t know exactly how they were killed.” But 800 civilians killed, no, 850, no question there. And I also said on repeated occasions, there cannot be any doubt, in my opinion as of now with the available evidence, that Hamas was responsible for significant atrocities, and I made sure to include the plural.
Steven Bonnell
There’s a lot of tricky language being employed here. Do you think of the 850-
There’s a lot of tricky language being employed here. Do you think of the 850-
Norman Finkelstein
There’s nothing tricky. It’s called attaching value to words and not talking like a motormouth. I am very careful about qualifying because that’s what language is about.
There’s nothing tricky. It’s called attaching value to words and not talking like a motormouth. I am very careful about qualifying because that’s what language is about.
Steven Bonnell
That’s great. Then let me just ask a clarifying question, do you firmly believe that the majority of the 850 civilians were killed by Hamas?
That’s great. Then let me just ask a clarifying question, do you firmly believe that the majority of the 850 civilians were killed by Hamas?
Norman Finkelstein
My view is, even if it were half, 400 is a huge number by any reckoning-
My view is, even if it were half, 400 is a huge number by any reckoning-
Benny Morris
Why-
Why-
Steven Bonnell
Okay, wait. You didn’t-
Okay, wait. You didn’t-
Norman Finkelstein
I said even if-
I said even if-
Steven Bonnell
Wait, wait, wait-
Wait, wait, wait-
Norman Finkelstein
Because Benny, because Professor Morris, I don’t know. I agree with Mouin Rabbani, I’m not sure if he concedes the 400. I’ll say-
Because Benny, because Professor Morris, I don’t know. I agree with Mouin Rabbani, I’m not sure if he concedes the 400. I’ll say-
Benny Morris
Why 400? Whoever thought up the number, 400? 800 of the 850 were slaughtered by Hamas. Maybe a couple of individuals were killed in Israeli action-
Why 400? Whoever thought up the number, 400? 800 of the 850 were slaughtered by Hamas. Maybe a couple of individuals were killed in Israeli action-
Norman Finkelstein
I don’t know. Professor Morris-
I don’t know. Professor Morris-
Steven Bonnell
You’re saying from day one, you believed this particular thing, and you clearly don’t. You clearly don’t believe this thing-
You’re saying from day one, you believed this particular thing, and you clearly don’t. You clearly don’t believe this thing-
Norman Finkelstein
I said from day one day one-
I said from day one day one-
Steven Bonnell
You said people died. That’s not controversial-
You said people died. That’s not controversial-
Mouin Rabbani
Wait. Hold on, hold on. If I may-
Wait. Hold on, hold on. If I may-
Steven Bonnell
That’s not controversial.
That’s not controversial.
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Bonnell, I attach value to words-
Mr. Bonnell, I attach value to words-
Steven Bonnell
Yes, you’ve said that. If you value them, stop repeating them so much.
Yes, you’ve said that. If you value them, stop repeating them so much.
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Bonnell, please slow down the speech and attempt to listen. When I was explicitly asked by Piers Morgan, I said there can be no question that Hamas committed atrocities-
Mr. Bonnell, please slow down the speech and attempt to listen. When I was explicitly asked by Piers Morgan, I said there can be no question that Hamas committed atrocities-
Steven Bonnell
Committed atrocities. I’ve heard this, yes.
Committed atrocities. I’ve heard this, yes.
Norman Finkelstein
… on October 7th. If you want me to pin down a number, I can’t do that-
… on October 7th. If you want me to pin down a number, I can’t do that-
Steven Bonnell
I didn’t ask you to pin down a number. You can listen to what I’m-
I didn’t ask you to pin down a number. You can listen to what I’m-
Norman Finkelstein
You didn’t ask me?
You didn’t ask me?
Steven Bonnell
No. My question is-
No. My question is-
Norman Finkelstein
Okay.
Okay.
Steven Bonnell
I’ll ask a very precise-
I’ll ask a very precise-
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Bonnell, I cannot speak to you because you’re not-
Mr. Bonnell, I cannot speak to you because you’re not-
Mouin Rabbani
Sorry, excuse me-
Sorry, excuse me-
Steven Bonnell
It’s a very easy question-
It’s a very easy question-
Mouin Rabbani
If I understood your question correctly-
If I understood your question correctly-
Steven Bonnell
My question is, do you think the majority of the people that were killed on October 7th, the civilians, were killed by Hamas, or are we subscribing to the idea that the IDF killed hundreds, four or 500 in the crossfire?
My question is, do you think the majority of the people that were killed on October 7th, the civilians, were killed by Hamas, or are we subscribing to the idea that the IDF killed hundreds, four or 500 in the crossfire?
Mouin Rabbani
No, but let me explain why that’s a difficult question to answer. The total number of civilians killed was 800, 850. We know that Hamas is responsible, probably for the majority of those killings. We also know that there were killings by Islamic Jihad. We also know-
No, but let me explain why that’s a difficult question to answer. The total number of civilians killed was 800, 850. We know that Hamas is responsible, probably for the majority of those killings. We also know that there were killings by Islamic Jihad. We also know-
Benny Morris
No, we’re Bunching together the Islamic Jihad and Hamas. That’s splitting hairs now-
No, we’re Bunching together the Islamic Jihad and Hamas. That’s splitting hairs now-
Mouin Rabbani
But his question was specifically about-
But his question was specifically about-
Benny Morris
No, but he means the raiders. He means the raiders.
No, but he means the raiders. He means the raiders.
Steven Bonnell
I’m speaking in opposition to the conspiracy theory that people like… Do you prefer Norm or Professor Finkelstein? I don’t know, how do you prefer to be addressed?
I’m speaking in opposition to the conspiracy theory that people like… Do you prefer Norm or Professor Finkelstein? I don’t know, how do you prefer to be addressed?
Mouin Rabbani
Well, it’s not a conspiracy theory there because it’s-
Well, it’s not a conspiracy theory there because it’s-
Steven Bonnell
Well, the conspiracy theory is the idea that the IDF killed the majority of them.
Well, the conspiracy theory is the idea that the IDF killed the majority of them.
Mouin Rabbani
It’s not a conspiracy theory-
It’s not a conspiracy theory-
Steven Bonnell
And there is also a theory that, as Norm pointed out on the show that he was on, that he thought that it was very strange that, given how reputable Israeli services are when it comes to sending ambulances, retrieving bodies, he thought it was very strange that that number was continually being adjusted-
And there is also a theory that, as Norm pointed out on the show that he was on, that he thought that it was very strange that, given how reputable Israeli services are when it comes to sending ambulances, retrieving bodies, he thought it was very strange that that number was continually being adjusted-
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah, I did find it-
Yeah, I did find it-
Mouin Rabbani
And do you know why-
And do you know why-
Steven Bonnell
So when you say that in combination with, “Well, I’m not sure how many were killed by Hamas and the IDF-“
So when you say that in combination with, “Well, I’m not sure how many were killed by Hamas and the IDF-“
Mouin Rabbani
Do you know why the number went down? The number went down because the Israeli authorities were in possession of 200 corpses that were burned to a crisp that they assumed were Israelis who had been killed on October 7th. They later determined that these were in fact Palestinian fighters. Now, how does a Palestinian fighter get burned to a crisp?
Do you know why the number went down? The number went down because the Israeli authorities were in possession of 200 corpses that were burned to a crisp that they assumed were Israelis who had been killed on October 7th. They later determined that these were in fact Palestinian fighters. Now, how does a Palestinian fighter get burned to a crisp?
Benny Morris
No, you’re mixing two things. Some of the bodies, they weren’t able to identify, and eventually they ruled that some of them were actually Arab marauders rather than Israeli victims. A few of them also of the Jews were burnt to a crisp and it took them time to work this out, and they came out initially with a slightly higher figure, 1,400 dead, and eventually reduced it to 1,200 dead Israelis-
No, you’re mixing two things. Some of the bodies, they weren’t able to identify, and eventually they ruled that some of them were actually Arab marauders rather than Israeli victims. A few of them also of the Jews were burnt to a crisp and it took them time to work this out, and they came out initially with a slightly higher figure, 1,400 dead, and eventually reduced it to 1,200 dead Israelis-
Mouin Rabbani
And the reason is that a proportion of Israeli civilians killed on October 7th… I don’t believe it was a majority. We don’t know how many. Some were killed in the crossfire, some were killed by Israeli shellfire, helicopter fire and so on, and the majority were killed by Palestinians. And of that majority, we don’t know… Again, I understood your question is referring specifically to Hamas, which is why I tried to answer it that way. But if you meant generically Palestinians, yes. If you mean specifically Hamas, we don’t have a clear breakdown of how many were-
And the reason is that a proportion of Israeli civilians killed on October 7th… I don’t believe it was a majority. We don’t know how many. Some were killed in the crossfire, some were killed by Israeli shellfire, helicopter fire and so on, and the majority were killed by Palestinians. And of that majority, we don’t know… Again, I understood your question is referring specifically to Hamas, which is why I tried to answer it that way. But if you meant generically Palestinians, yes. If you mean specifically Hamas, we don’t have a clear breakdown of how many were-
Steven Bonnell
No, I don’t mean specifically Hamas. But I just think when you use the word some, that’s doing a lot of heavy lifting.
No, I don’t mean specifically Hamas. But I just think when you use the word some, that’s doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Norman Finkelstein
Who used some?
Who used some?
Steven Bonnell
That’s fine. But some can mean anywhere from 1% to 49%-
That’s fine. But some can mean anywhere from 1% to 49%-
Norman Finkelstein
Who used some?
Who used some?
Mouin Rabbani
But we don’t know.
But we don’t know.
Lex Fridman
So the numbers here in the details are interesting and important almost from a legal perspective, but if we zoom out, the moral perspective, are Palestinians from Gaza justified in violent resistance?
So the numbers here in the details are interesting and important almost from a legal perspective, but if we zoom out, the moral perspective, are Palestinians from Gaza justified in violent resistance?
Mouin Rabbani
Well, Palestinians have the right to resistance. That right includes the right to armed resistance. At the same time, armed resistance is subject to the laws of war, and there are very clear regulations that separate legitimate acts of armed resistance from acts of armed resistance that are not legitimate-
Well, Palestinians have the right to resistance. That right includes the right to armed resistance. At the same time, armed resistance is subject to the laws of war, and there are very clear regulations that separate legitimate acts of armed resistance from acts of armed resistance that are not legitimate-
Lex Fridman
The attacks of October 7th, where do they land for you?
The attacks of October 7th, where do they land for you?
Mouin Rabbani
There’s been almost exclusive focus on the attacks on civilian population centers and the killings of civilians on October 7th. What is much less discussed to the point of amnesia is that there were very extensive attacks on Israeli military and intelligence facilities on October 7th. I would make a very clear distinction between those two. And secondly, I’m not sure that I would characterize the efforts by Palestinians on October 7th to seize Israeli territory and Israeli population centers as in and of themselves illegitimate.
There’s been almost exclusive focus on the attacks on civilian population centers and the killings of civilians on October 7th. What is much less discussed to the point of amnesia is that there were very extensive attacks on Israeli military and intelligence facilities on October 7th. I would make a very clear distinction between those two. And secondly, I’m not sure that I would characterize the efforts by Palestinians on October 7th to seize Israeli territory and Israeli population centers as in and of themselves illegitimate.
Benny Morris
You mean attacking Israeli civilians is legitimate?
You mean attacking Israeli civilians is legitimate?
Mouin Rabbani
No. That’s not what I said.
No. That’s not what I said.
Benny Morris
I didn’t understand what you said.
I didn’t understand what you said.
Mouin Rabbani
I think what you had on October 7th was an effort by Hamas to seize Israeli territory and population centers-
I think what you had on October 7th was an effort by Hamas to seize Israeli territory and population centers-
Benny Morris
And kill civilians.
And kill civilians.
Mouin Rabbani
That’s not what I said. What I said is, I would not describe the effort to seize Israeli territory as in and of itself illegitimate, as a separate issue from the killing of Israeli civilians in those cases where they had been deliberately targeted. That’s very clearly illegitimate.
That’s not what I said. What I said is, I would not describe the effort to seize Israeli territory as in and of itself illegitimate, as a separate issue from the killing of Israeli civilians in those cases where they had been deliberately targeted. That’s very clearly illegitimate.
Benny Morris
Whole families were slaughtered in kibbutzim, many of them left-wingers incidentally who helped Palestinians go to hospitals in Israel and so on, even drove Palestinian cancer patients to hospitals in Israeli-
Whole families were slaughtered in kibbutzim, many of them left-wingers incidentally who helped Palestinians go to hospitals in Israel and so on, even drove Palestinian cancer patients to hospitals in Israeli-
Mouin Rabbani
Again, I’m making a distinction here-
Again, I’m making a distinction here-
Benny Morris
But you don’t seem to be very condemnatory of what the Hamas did.
But you don’t seem to be very condemnatory of what the Hamas did.
Mouin Rabbani
Well, I don’t do selective condemnation-
Well, I don’t do selective condemnation-
Benny Morris
I’m not talking about selective. I’m talking about-
I’m not talking about selective. I’m talking about-
Mouin Rabbani
I don’t do selective outrage.
I don’t do selective outrage.
Benny Morris
… specific condemnation of this specific assault on civilians. I would, for example, condemn Israeli assaults on civilians, deliberate assaults on civilians. I would condemn them, but you’re not doing that with the Hamas.
… specific condemnation of this specific assault on civilians. I would, for example, condemn Israeli assaults on civilians, deliberate assaults on civilians. I would condemn them, but you’re not doing that with the Hamas.
Mouin Rabbani
You know what the issue is?
You know what the issue is?
Benny Morris
What?
What?
Mouin Rabbani
I’ve been speaking in public now, I would say since the late-1980s and interviewed and so on. I have never on one occasion ever been asked to condemn any Israeli act. When I’ve been in group discussions, those supporting the Israeli action or perspective, I have never encountered an example where these individuals are asked to condemn what Israel is doing. The demand and obligation of condemnation is exclusively applied, in my personal experience over decades, is exclusively applied to Palestinians-
I’ve been speaking in public now, I would say since the late-1980s and interviewed and so on. I have never on one occasion ever been asked to condemn any Israeli act. When I’ve been in group discussions, those supporting the Israeli action or perspective, I have never encountered an example where these individuals are asked to condemn what Israel is doing. The demand and obligation of condemnation is exclusively applied, in my personal experience over decades, is exclusively applied to Palestinians-
Benny Morris
No, this is [inaudible 02:25:04] Israel is condemned day and night on every television channel, and has been for the last-
No, this is [inaudible 02:25:04] Israel is condemned day and night on every television channel, and has been for the last-
Mouin Rabbani
I’m telling you about personal experience lasting decades-
I’m telling you about personal experience lasting decades-
Norman Finkelstein
You said quote-
You said quote-
Steven Bonnell
Uh-oh. Oh, no.
Uh-oh. Oh, no.
Norman Finkelstein
I’m trying to quote what you just said. You said-
I’m trying to quote what you just said. You said-
Benny Morris
I shouldn’t have said anything at any [inaudible 02:25:20]
I shouldn’t have said anything at any [inaudible 02:25:20]
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris?
Professor Morris?
Benny Morris
Yes.
Yes.
Norman Finkelstein
You just said, “I would condemn anytime Israel deliberately attacks civilians.” The problem, Professor Morris, is, over and over again, you claim in the face of overwhelming evidence that they didn’t attack civilians-
You just said, “I would condemn anytime Israel deliberately attacks civilians.” The problem, Professor Morris, is, over and over again, you claim in the face of overwhelming evidence that they didn’t attack civilians-
Benny Morris
That’s not true. I’ve said Israel has attacked civilians. In [inaudible 02:25:51] Israel attacked civilians, and I’ve written extensively about it. In Kfar Qasim, they killed civilians, and I’ve written that. So you’re just admitting you’re selecting… As Steven says, you cherry-pick. You cherry-pick.
That’s not true. I’ve said Israel has attacked civilians. In [inaudible 02:25:51] Israel attacked civilians, and I’ve written extensively about it. In Kfar Qasim, they killed civilians, and I’ve written that. So you’re just admitting you’re selecting… As Steven says, you cherry-pick. You cherry-pick.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, let’s fast-forward. When you were an adult, what did you say about the 1982 Lebanon War?
Okay, let’s fast-forward. When you were an adult, what did you say about the 1982 Lebanon War?
Benny Morris
What did I say?
What did I say?
Norman Finkelstein
You don’t remember? Okay, allow me.
You don’t remember? Okay, allow me.
Steven Bonnell
Uh-oh.
Uh-oh.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. So it happens that I had no interest in the Israel-Palestine conflict as a young man-
Okay. So it happens that I had no interest in the Israel-Palestine conflict as a young man-
Benny Morris
This is true.
This is true.
Norman Finkelstein
… until the 1982 Lebanon War.
… until the 1982 Lebanon War.
Benny Morris
Yep. He’s lost the passage-
Yep. He’s lost the passage-
Norman Finkelstein
I’ll find it.
I’ll find it.
Steven Bonnell
Okay, real quick while he’s searching for that, you bring up something that’s really important that a lot of people don’t draw a distinction between, in that there is just causes for war and there is just ways to act within a war, and these two things principally do have a distinction from one another.
Okay, real quick while he’s searching for that, you bring up something that’s really important that a lot of people don’t draw a distinction between, in that there is just causes for war and there is just ways to act within a war, and these two things principally do have a distinction from one another.
Mouin Rabbani
Correct.
Correct.
Steven Bonnell
However, while I appreciate the recognition of the distinction, the idea that the cause for war that Hamas was engaged in, if we look at their actions in war or the statements that they’ve made, it doesn’t seem like it had to do with the territorial acquisition.
However, while I appreciate the recognition of the distinction, the idea that the cause for war that Hamas was engaged in, if we look at their actions in war or the statements that they’ve made, it doesn’t seem like it had to do with the territorial acquisition.
Mouin Rabbani
No, no, no-
No, no, no-
Steven Bonnell
By taking land back.
By taking land back.
Mouin Rabbani
No, the point I was making was, what was Hamas trying to achieve militarily on October 7th? And I was pointing out that the focus has been very much on Hamas attacks on civilians and atrocities and so on. And I’m not saying those things should be ignored. What I’m saying is that what’s getting lost in the shuffle is that there were extensive attacks on military and intelligence facilities. And as far as the other aspects are concerned, because I think either you or Lex asked me about the legitimacy of these attacks, I said I’m unclear whether efforts by Hamas to seize Israeli population centers in and of themselves are illegitimate as opposed to actions that either deliberately targeted Israeli civilians or actions that should reasonably have been expected to result in the killings of Israeli civilians. Those strike me as, by definition, illegitimate, and I want to be very clear about that. I have-
No, the point I was making was, what was Hamas trying to achieve militarily on October 7th? And I was pointing out that the focus has been very much on Hamas attacks on civilians and atrocities and so on. And I’m not saying those things should be ignored. What I’m saying is that what’s getting lost in the shuffle is that there were extensive attacks on military and intelligence facilities. And as far as the other aspects are concerned, because I think either you or Lex asked me about the legitimacy of these attacks, I said I’m unclear whether efforts by Hamas to seize Israeli population centers in and of themselves are illegitimate as opposed to actions that either deliberately targeted Israeli civilians or actions that should reasonably have been expected to result in the killings of Israeli civilians. Those strike me as, by definition, illegitimate, and I want to be very clear about that. I have-
Benny Morris
Illegitimate means you condemn them?
Illegitimate means you condemn them?
Mouin Rabbani
Illegitimate means they are not legitimate. I have a problem-
Illegitimate means they are not legitimate. I have a problem-
Benny Morris
Condemning your side, yes.
Condemning your side, yes.
Mouin Rabbani
No, not condemning my side. I have a problem with selective outrage and I have a problem with selective condemnation. And as I explained to you a few minutes ago, in my decades of appearing in public and being interviewed, I have never been asked to condemn an Israeli action, I’ve never been asked for a moral judgment on an Israeli action. Exclusive requests for condemnation has to do with what Palestinians [inaudible 02:29:01] And just as importantly, I’m sure if you watch BBC or CNN, when is the last time an Israeli spokesperson has been asked to condemn an Israeli act? I’ve never seen it.
No, not condemning my side. I have a problem with selective outrage and I have a problem with selective condemnation. And as I explained to you a few minutes ago, in my decades of appearing in public and being interviewed, I have never been asked to condemn an Israeli action, I’ve never been asked for a moral judgment on an Israeli action. Exclusive requests for condemnation has to do with what Palestinians [inaudible 02:29:01] And just as importantly, I’m sure if you watch BBC or CNN, when is the last time an Israeli spokesperson has been asked to condemn an Israeli act? I’ve never seen it.
Steven Bonnell
I don’t think we condemn the Arab side either though, right? I don’t think there’s any condemnation-
I don’t think we condemn the Arab side either though, right? I don’t think there’s any condemnation-
Mouin Rabbani
No. But now that we’re talking about Israeli victims, all of a sudden morality is central-
No. But now that we’re talking about Israeli victims, all of a sudden morality is central-
Steven Bonnell
Well, I think the reason why it comes up is because there’s no shortage of international condemnation for Israel. As Norm will point out a million times, that there are 50 billion UN resolutions, you’ve got Amnesty International, you’ve got multiple bodies of the UN, you’ve got now this case for the ICJ. So there’s no question of if there’s condemnation for Israel-
Well, I think the reason why it comes up is because there’s no shortage of international condemnation for Israel. As Norm will point out a million times, that there are 50 billion UN resolutions, you’ve got Amnesty International, you’ve got multiple bodies of the UN, you’ve got now this case for the ICJ. So there’s no question of if there’s condemnation for Israel-
Mouin Rabbani
But sorry, if I can interrupt you, in 1948, the entire world stood behind the establishment of a Jewish state, and the entire world-
But sorry, if I can interrupt you, in 1948, the entire world stood behind the establishment of a Jewish state, and the entire world-
Benny Morris
No, except Arab states and the Muslim states. Not the entire world.
No, except Arab states and the Muslim states. Not the entire world.
Mouin Rabbani
Okay, but I think you know what I mean by that.
Okay, but I think you know what I mean by that.
Benny Morris
The Western democracies, that’s what you’re saying. Western democracies supported the establishment of Israel.
The Western democracies, that’s what you’re saying. Western democracies supported the establishment of Israel.
Steven Bonnell
My quick question was, you said that you believe that… This is a very short one, you don’t have to… You think that there’s an argument to be made that the people in Gaza, Hamas and Islamic Jihad or whoever participated had a just cause for war. Maybe they didn’t do it in the correct way, but they maybe had a just cause for war, which is-
My quick question was, you said that you believe that… This is a very short one, you don’t have to… You think that there’s an argument to be made that the people in Gaza, Hamas and Islamic Jihad or whoever participated had a just cause for war. Maybe they didn’t do it in the correct way, but they maybe had a just cause for war, which is-
Mouin Rabbani
I don’t think there’s a maybe there. The Palestinians have-
I don’t think there’s a maybe there. The Palestinians have-
Steven Bonnell
Okay, you think they absolutely had a just cause for it.
Okay, you think they absolutely had a just cause for it.
Mouin Rabbani
Yes.
Yes.
Steven Bonnell
Do you think that Israel has a just cause for Operation Swords of Iron?
Do you think that Israel has a just cause for Operation Swords of Iron?
Mouin Rabbani
No, of course not.
No, of course not.
Steven Bonnell
All right. You can say your quote.
All right. You can say your quote.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. First of all, on this issue of double standards, which is the one that irks or irritates Mouin, you said that you are not a person of double standards, unlike people like Mouin. You hold high a single standard and you condemn deliberate Israeli attacks on-
Okay. First of all, on this issue of double standards, which is the one that irks or irritates Mouin, you said that you are not a person of double standards, unlike people like Mouin. You hold high a single standard and you condemn deliberate Israeli attacks on-
Mouin Rabbani
Civilians.
Civilians.
Norman Finkelstein
… civilians. And I would say that’s true for the period up till 1967, and I think it’s accurate, your account of the First Intifada. There, it seems to me you are in conformity with most mainstream accounts and the case of the First Intifada. Surprisingly, you used Arab human rights sources like Al-Haq, which I think Mouin worked for during the First Intifada. That’s true. But then something very strange happens, so let’s illustrate it-
… civilians. And I would say that’s true for the period up till 1967, and I think it’s accurate, your account of the First Intifada. There, it seems to me you are in conformity with most mainstream accounts and the case of the First Intifada. Surprisingly, you used Arab human rights sources like Al-Haq, which I think Mouin worked for during the First Intifada. That’s true. But then something very strange happens, so let’s illustrate it-
Benny Morris
Wait, the something strange which happened is the Arabs rejected Israel’s peace offers-
Wait, the something strange which happened is the Arabs rejected Israel’s peace offers-
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, wait.
Okay, wait.
Benny Morris
That’s what happened.
That’s what happened.
Mouin Rabbani
By accepting the Oslo agreements.
By accepting the Oslo agreements.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah.
Yeah.
Benny Morris
Not the-
Not the-
Steven Bonnell
By rejecting… He’s talking about Camp David and Taba.
By rejecting… He’s talking about Camp David and Taba.
Benny Morris
I’m talking about Camp David.
I’m talking about Camp David.
Norman Finkelstein
If we have time, I know the record very well, I’d be very happy to go through it with you, but let’s get to those double standards. So, this is what you have to say about Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982. You said, “Israel was reluctant to harm civilians, sought to avoid casualties on both sides, and took care not to harm Lebanese and Palestinian civilians.” You then went on to acknowledge the massive use of IDF firepower against civilians during the Siege of Beirut which traumatized Israeli society. Morris quickly enters the caveat that Israel “tried to pinpoint military targets, but inevitably many civilians were hit.”
If we have time, I know the record very well, I’d be very happy to go through it with you, but let’s get to those double standards. So, this is what you have to say about Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982. You said, “Israel was reluctant to harm civilians, sought to avoid casualties on both sides, and took care not to harm Lebanese and Palestinian civilians.” You then went on to acknowledge the massive use of IDF firepower against civilians during the Siege of Beirut which traumatized Israeli society. Morris quickly enters the caveat that Israel “tried to pinpoint military targets, but inevitably many civilians were hit.”
That’s your description of the Lebanon War. As I say, that’s when I first got involved in the conflict. I am a voracious reader. I read everything on the Lebanon War. I would say there’s not a single account of the Lebanon War in which the estimates are between 15 and 20,000 Palestinian, Lebanese were killed, overwhelmingly civilians, the biggest bloodletting until the current Gaza genocide. Biggest bloodletting. I would say I can’t think of a single mainstream account that remotely approximates what you just said. So leaving aside… I can name the books. Voluminous, huge volumes. I’ll just take one example. Now you will remember, because I think you served in Lebanon in ’82. Am I correct on that?
Benny Morris
Yeah.
Yeah.
Norman Finkelstein
So you will remember that Dov Yermiya kept a war diary. So with your permission, allow me to describe what he wrote during his diary. He writes, “The war machine of the IDF is galloping and trampling over the conquered territory, demonstrating a total insensitivity to the fate of the Arabs who are found in its path. A PLO-run hospital suffered a direct hit. Thousands of refugees are returning to the city. When they arrive at their homes, many of which have been destroyed or damaged, you hear their cries of pain and their howls over the deaths of their loved ones. The air is permeated with the smell of corpses. Destruction and death are continuing-“
So you will remember that Dov Yermiya kept a war diary. So with your permission, allow me to describe what he wrote during his diary. He writes, “The war machine of the IDF is galloping and trampling over the conquered territory, demonstrating a total insensitivity to the fate of the Arabs who are found in its path. A PLO-run hospital suffered a direct hit. Thousands of refugees are returning to the city. When they arrive at their homes, many of which have been destroyed or damaged, you hear their cries of pain and their howls over the deaths of their loved ones. The air is permeated with the smell of corpses. Destruction and death are continuing-“
Benny Morris
Yeah, point made. The point you’re making actually-
Yeah, point made. The point you’re making actually-
Norman Finkelstein
Does that sound like your description of the Lebanon War?
Does that sound like your description of the Lebanon War?
Benny Morris
Forget my description-
Forget my description-
Norman Finkelstein
Forget it?
Forget it?
Benny Morris
The point you’re making-
The point you’re making-
Norman Finkelstein
The words are in print. We can’t just forget them-
The words are in print. We can’t just forget them-
Benny Morris
Let me just finish my sentence. The point you’re making, which you somehow forget, is that there are Israelis who strongly criticize their own side and describe how Israelis are doing things which they regard as immoral. You don’t find that on the Arab sides-
Let me just finish my sentence. The point you’re making, which you somehow forget, is that there are Israelis who strongly criticize their own side and describe how Israelis are doing things which they regard as immoral. You don’t find that on the Arab sides-
Norman Finkelstein
I’m talking about you, Mr. Morris. I’m not talking about Dov Yermiya, I’m talking about you, the historian. How did you depict the Lebanon War?
I’m talking about you, Mr. Morris. I’m not talking about Dov Yermiya, I’m talking about you, the historian. How did you depict the Lebanon War?
Benny Morris
Because I believe that the Israeli military tried to avoid committing a civilian [inaudible 02:35:18] as I think they fail to do in Gaza now-
Because I believe that the Israeli military tried to avoid committing a civilian [inaudible 02:35:18] as I think they fail to do in Gaza now-
Norman Finkelstein
All the accounts by Robert Fisk in Pity the Nation-
All the accounts by Robert Fisk in Pity the Nation-
Benny Morris
Robert Fisk is a anti-Zionist journalist-
Robert Fisk is a anti-Zionist journalist-
Norman Finkelstein
I know.
I know.
Benny Morris
Has always been.
Has always been.
Norman Finkelstein
Right. So that’s why you can say with such confidence that you don’t condemn deliberate Israeli attacks on civilians-
Right. So that’s why you can say with such confidence that you don’t condemn deliberate Israeli attacks on civilians-
Mouin Rabbani
Because there weren’t any.
Because there weren’t any.
Norman Finkelstein
… because there weren’t any.
… because there weren’t any.
Benny Morris
No, I didn’t say there weren’t any-
No, I didn’t say there weren’t any-
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah, you didn’t?
Yeah, you didn’t?
Benny Morris
You agreed that I have condemned Israeli attacks on civilians.
You agreed that I have condemned Israeli attacks on civilians.
Norman Finkelstein
I never quarrel with facts. Your description of the 1982 War is so shocking, it makes my innards writhe. And then your description of the Second Intifada, your description of Defensive Shield, they were worse than apologetics-
I never quarrel with facts. Your description of the 1982 War is so shocking, it makes my innards writhe. And then your description of the Second Intifada, your description of Defensive Shield, they were worse than apologetics-
Benny Morris
When Arab suicide bombers were destroying Jews in masses in buses and in restaurants, that’s the Second Intifada. Do you remember that?
When Arab suicide bombers were destroying Jews in masses in buses and in restaurants, that’s the Second Intifada. Do you remember that?
Norman Finkelstein
You can try everything-
You can try everything-
Benny Morris
Suicide bombers in Jerusalem’s buses and restaurants, and in Tel Aviv-
Suicide bombers in Jerusalem’s buses and restaurants, and in Tel Aviv-
Norman Finkelstein
I am completely aware of that, but if you forgot the numbers-
I am completely aware of that, but if you forgot the numbers-
Benny Morris
I don’t forget the numbers-
I don’t forget the numbers-
Norman Finkelstein
… it was three to one. The number-
… it was three to one. The number-
Benny Morris
They killed mostly armed-
They killed mostly armed-
Norman Finkelstein
No-
No-
Benny Morris
… Palestinian gunmen.
… Palestinian gunmen.
Norman Finkelstein
That’s what you say in your book-
That’s what you say in your book-
Benny Morris
That’s what I say. That’s what I think.
That’s what I say. That’s what I think.
Norman Finkelstein
… but that’s not what Amnesty International said. That’s not what Human Rights Watch said-
… but that’s not what Amnesty International said. That’s not what Human Rights Watch said-
Benny Morris
I don’t remember what they said.
I don’t remember what they said.
Norman Finkelstein
I do. That’s not what [inaudible 02:36:45] said-
I do. That’s not what [inaudible 02:36:45] said-
Benny Morris
I don’t know whether their figures are right. My figures are right.
I don’t know whether their figures are right. My figures are right.
Norman Finkelstein
Listen, listen-
Listen, listen-
Benny Morris
In the Second Intifada, some 4,000 Palestinians were killed, most of them armed people. And 1,000 Israelis were killed, almost all of them [inaudible 02:36:59] civilians.
In the Second Intifada, some 4,000 Palestinians were killed, most of them armed people. And 1,000 Israelis were killed, almost all of them [inaudible 02:36:59] civilians.
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris, fantasy, but I’m not going to argue with here. Here’s a simple challenge… You said not to look at the camera-
Professor Morris, fantasy, but I’m not going to argue with here. Here’s a simple challenge… You said not to look at the camera-
Lex Fridman
Sometimes.
Sometimes.
Norman Finkelstein
It scares the people. I’ll make the open challenge.
It scares the people. I’ll make the open challenge.
Benny Morris
You are going to scare them.
You are going to scare them.
Norman Finkelstein
No. Professor Morris-
No. Professor Morris-
Steven Bonnell
Open challenge.
Open challenge.
Norman Finkelstein
… words are in print. I wrote 50 pages analyzing all of your work. I quote, some will say cherry-pick but I think, accurately quote you. Here’s a simple challenge. Answer me in print. Answer what I wrote and show where I’m making things up. Answer me in print-
… words are in print. I wrote 50 pages analyzing all of your work. I quote, some will say cherry-pick but I think, accurately quote you. Here’s a simple challenge. Answer me in print. Answer what I wrote and show where I’m making things up. Answer me in print-
Benny Morris
I’m not familiar. I’m sorry, but I’m not familiar with what you wrote.
I’m not familiar. I’m sorry, but I’m not familiar with what you wrote.
Norman Finkelstein
That’s no problem. You’re a busy man, you’re an important historian. You don’t have to know everything that’s in print, especially by modest publishers. But now you know, and so here’s the public challenge. You answer and show where I cherry-picked, where I misrepresented-
That’s no problem. You’re a busy man, you’re an important historian. You don’t have to know everything that’s in print, especially by modest publishers. But now you know, and so here’s the public challenge. You answer and show where I cherry-picked, where I misrepresented-
Benny Morris
Send me the article, I will-
Send me the article, I will-
Norman Finkelstein
Fine, I will, and then we can have a civil scholarly discussion and-
Fine, I will, and then we can have a civil scholarly discussion and-
Benny Morris
I’m not sure we will agree, even if I-
I’m not sure we will agree, even if I-
Norman Finkelstein
We don’t have to agree. It’s for the reader to decide, looking at both sides, where this truth stands.
We don’t have to agree. It’s for the reader to decide, looking at both sides, where this truth stands.
Lex Fridman
Norman, and if I may ask, it’s good to discuss ideas that are in the air now as opposed to citing literature that was written in the past as much as possible, because of the listeners were not familiar with the literature. So whatever was written, just express it, condense the key idea, and then we can debate the ideas or discuss the ideas.
Norman, and if I may ask, it’s good to discuss ideas that are in the air now as opposed to citing literature that was written in the past as much as possible, because of the listeners were not familiar with the literature. So whatever was written, just express it, condense the key idea, and then we can debate the ideas or discuss the ideas.
Norman Finkelstein
No, there are two aspects. There’s this public debate, but there’s also written words.
No, there are two aspects. There’s this public debate, but there’s also written words.
Lex Fridman
Yes. I’m just telling you that you as a academic historian put a lot of value in the written word and I think it is valuable, but in this context-
Yes. I’m just telling you that you as a academic historian put a lot of value in the written word and I think it is valuable, but in this context-
Norman Finkelstein
He’s incidentally not the only historian who puts value to words. I also do, actually. Just so we-
He’s incidentally not the only historian who puts value to words. I also do, actually. Just so we-
Lex Fridman
Yes, but in this-
Yes, but in this-
Steven Bonnell
More than just one or two sentences at a time.
More than just one or two sentences at a time.
Lex Fridman
But in this context, just for the educational purpose of teaching people-
But in this context, just for the educational purpose of teaching people-
Norman Finkelstein
Well, the educational purpose is, why would people [inaudible 02:39:05] what I have to acknowledge? Because I am faithful to the facts. Massive atrocities on October 7th. Why did that happen? And I think that’s the problem, the past is erased and we suddenly went from 1948 to October 7th, 2023, and there is a problem there.
Well, the educational purpose is, why would people [inaudible 02:39:05] what I have to acknowledge? Because I am faithful to the facts. Massive atrocities on October 7th. Why did that happen? And I think that’s the problem, the past is erased and we suddenly went from 1948 to October 7th, 2023, and there is a problem there.
Lex Fridman
So first of all, you have complete freedom to backtrack and we’ll go there with you. Obviously we can’t cover every single year, every single event, but there’s probably critical moments in time.
So first of all, you have complete freedom to backtrack and we’ll go there with you. Obviously we can’t cover every single year, every single event, but there’s probably critical moments in time.
Steven Bonnell
Can I respond to something relating to that, the Lebanon War? I looked at the book that he got this from and what the quote was from. It sounds cold to say it, but war is tragic and civilians die. There is no war that this has not happened in, in the history of all of humankind. The statement that Israel might take care not to target civilians is not incompatible with a diary entry from someone who said they saw civilians getting killed. I think that sometimes we do a lot of weird games when we talk about international humanitarian law or laws that govern conflict, but we say things like, civilians dying is a war crime, or civilian homes or hospitals getting destroyed is necessarily a war crime, or is necessarily somebody intentionally targeting civilians without making distinctions between military targets or civilian ones.
Can I respond to something relating to that, the Lebanon War? I looked at the book that he got this from and what the quote was from. It sounds cold to say it, but war is tragic and civilians die. There is no war that this has not happened in, in the history of all of humankind. The statement that Israel might take care not to target civilians is not incompatible with a diary entry from someone who said they saw civilians getting killed. I think that sometimes we do a lot of weird games when we talk about international humanitarian law or laws that govern conflict, but we say things like, civilians dying is a war crime, or civilian homes or hospitals getting destroyed is necessarily a war crime, or is necessarily somebody intentionally targeting civilians without making distinctions between military targets or civilian ones.
I think that when we analyze different attacks or when we talk about the conduct of the military, it’s important to understand, prospectively from the unit of analysis of the actual military committing the acts, what’s happening and what are the decisions being made rather than just saying retrospectively, “Oh, well, a lot of civilians died. Not very many military people died, comparatively speaking, so it must have been war crimes,” especially when you’ve got another side, I’ll fast-forward to Hamas, that intentionally attempts to induce those same civilian numbers, because Hamas is guilty of any war crime that you would potentially accuse. And this is according to the Amnesty International, people that Norm loves to cite, Hamas is guilty of all of these same war crimes, of them failing to take care of their civilian population, of them essentially utilizing human shields to try to fire rockets, free from attacks-
Norman Finkelstein
Essentially?
Essentially?
Steven Bonnell
Essentially, yes. I’m just saying that, essentially, as in terms of how international law defines it and not how Amnesty International defines it. But Amnesty International describes times of human shielding, but they don’t actually apply the correct international legal standard-
Essentially, yes. I’m just saying that, essentially, as in terms of how international law defines it and not how Amnesty International defines it. But Amnesty International describes times of human shielding, but they don’t actually apply the correct international legal standard-
Norman Finkelstein
You don’t know what’s the correct international law-
You don’t know what’s the correct international law-
Steven Bonnell
I know absolutely-
I know absolutely-
Norman Finkelstein
You haven’t a clue-
You haven’t a clue-
Steven Bonnell
No, I absolutely do-
No, I absolutely do-
Norman Finkelstein
You haven’t a clue because you can’t find it on Wikipedia. You can’t find it on Wikipedia-
You haven’t a clue because you can’t find it on Wikipedia. You can’t find it on Wikipedia-
Steven Bonnell
But I’m just saying… Believe it or not, Norm, the entire Geneva Convention is all on Wikipedia. It’s a wonderful website. But I’m just saying that on the Hamas side, if there’s an attempt to induce this type of military activity, attempt to induce civilian harm, that it’s not just enough to say, “Well, here’s a diary entry where a guy talks about how tragic these attacks are.”
But I’m just saying… Believe it or not, Norm, the entire Geneva Convention is all on Wikipedia. It’s a wonderful website. But I’m just saying that on the Hamas side, if there’s an attempt to induce this type of military activity, attempt to induce civilian harm, that it’s not just enough to say, “Well, here’s a diary entry where a guy talks about how tragic these attacks are.”
Mouin Rabbani
See, I think the problem with your statement is that if you go back and listen to it, the first part of it is, war is hell, civilians die. It’s a fact of life. And you state that in a very factual matter. Then when you start talking about Hamas, all of a sudden you’ve discovered morality and you’ve discovered condemnation and you’ve discovered intent, and you are unfortunately far from alone in this. I’ll give you… You know who for me is a perfect example?
See, I think the problem with your statement is that if you go back and listen to it, the first part of it is, war is hell, civilians die. It’s a fact of life. And you state that in a very factual matter. Then when you start talking about Hamas, all of a sudden you’ve discovered morality and you’ve discovered condemnation and you’ve discovered intent, and you are unfortunately far from alone in this. I’ll give you… You know who for me is a perfect example?
Steven Bonnell
Wait, hold on. We’re [inaudible 02:42:14]. We don’t need examples-
Wait, hold on. We’re [inaudible 02:42:14]. We don’t need examples-
Mouin Rabbani
No… Oh, go ahead.
No… Oh, go ahead.
Steven Bonnell
The false equivalency of the two sides is astounding. When Hamas kills civilians in a surprise attack on October 7th, this isn’t because they are attempting to target military targets and they happen to stumble into a giant festival of people that-
The false equivalency of the two sides is astounding. When Hamas kills civilians in a surprise attack on October 7th, this isn’t because they are attempting to target military targets and they happen to stumble into a giant festival of people that-
Mouin Rabbani
Well, they did happen to stumble into it.
Well, they did happen to stumble into it.
Steven Bonnell
They did, but-
They did, but-
Benny Morris
And they killed 300 people in the music festival-
And they killed 300 people in the music festival-
Steven Bonnell
But when they stumbled into it, that wasn’t an issue of trying to figure out a military target or not. They weren’t failing a distinction. There wasn’t a proportionality assessment done. It was just to kill civilians. Even the Amnesty International in 2008 and in 2014, and even today, will continue to say that there’s likely types of attacks-
But when they stumbled into it, that wasn’t an issue of trying to figure out a military target or not. They weren’t failing a distinction. There wasn’t a proportionality assessment done. It was just to kill civilians. Even the Amnesty International in 2008 and in 2014, and even today, will continue to say that there’s likely types of attacks-
Mouin Rabbani
Look, I don’t think you’ll find anyone who will deny that Hamas has targeted civilians. You gave the example-
Look, I don’t think you’ll find anyone who will deny that Hamas has targeted civilians. You gave the example-
Steven Bonnell
But there’s a difference because-
But there’s a difference because-
Mouin Rabbani
… of suicide bombings during the Second Intifada. Facts are facts-
… of suicide bombings during the Second Intifada. Facts are facts-
Steven Bonnell
Sure, but I’m just saying that the Hamas targeting of innocent civilians is different than the incidental loss of life that occurs when Israel does-
Sure, but I’m just saying that the Hamas targeting of innocent civilians is different than the incidental loss of life that occurs when Israel does-
Norman Finkelstein
Whoa, the incidental loss of life-
Whoa, the incidental loss of life-
Mouin Rabbani
Genocide is the intentional mass murder-
Genocide is the intentional mass murder-
Steven Bonnell
Well, genocide is a entirely separate claim.
Well, genocide is a entirely separate claim.
Mouin Rabbani
Yeah, but the idea that Israel is not in the business of intentionally targeting civilians, I know that’s what we’re supposed to believe, but the historical record stands pretty clearly-
Yeah, but the idea that Israel is not in the business of intentionally targeting civilians, I know that’s what we’re supposed to believe, but the historical record stands pretty clearly-
Steven Bonnell
No, it doesn’t. I don’t believe it does.
No, it doesn’t. I don’t believe it does.
Mouin Rabbani
You’ve written about it yourself-
You’ve written about it yourself-
Steven Bonnell
Well, when you say historical, do you mean in the ’40s to the ’60s, or do you mean over the past-
Well, when you say historical, do you mean in the ’40s to the ’60s, or do you mean over the past-
Mouin Rabbani
I would say from the ’30s of the last century to the ’20s of this century. The way you characterized it, I think the best example of that I’ve come across during this specific conflict is John Kirby, the White House spokesman. I’ve named him Tears Tosterone, for a very good reason. When he is talking about Palestinian civilian deaths, war is hell, it’s a fact of life, get used to it. When he was confronted with Israeli civilian deaths on October 7th, he literally broke down in tears in public-
I would say from the ’30s of the last century to the ’20s of this century. The way you characterized it, I think the best example of that I’ve come across during this specific conflict is John Kirby, the White House spokesman. I’ve named him Tears Tosterone, for a very good reason. When he is talking about Palestinian civilian deaths, war is hell, it’s a fact of life, get used to it. When he was confronted with Israeli civilian deaths on October 7th, he literally broke down in tears in public-
Benny Morris
But he understood that one is deliberate and one isn’t. He understood that.
But he understood that one is deliberate and one isn’t. He understood that.
Mouin Rabbani
No, that’s what he tried to make us understand.
No, that’s what he tried to make us understand.
Benny Morris
No, he was speaking facts. The Hamas guys who attacked the kibbutzim, apart from the attacks on the military sites, when they attacked the kibbutzim, were out to kill civilians. And they killed family after family, house after house. The Israeli attacks on Hamas installations-
No, he was speaking facts. The Hamas guys who attacked the kibbutzim, apart from the attacks on the military sites, when they attacked the kibbutzim, were out to kill civilians. And they killed family after family, house after house. The Israeli attacks on Hamas installations-
Mouin Rabbani
You know better. You know better-
You know better. You know better-
Benny Morris
No, I don’t know better. You don’t know Israeli pilots, that’s the problem-
No, I don’t know better. You don’t know Israeli pilots, that’s the problem-
Norman Finkelstein
Thank God.
Thank God.
Benny Morris
No, you don’t know Israeli pilots-
No, you don’t know Israeli pilots-
Norman Finkelstein
I know, thank God.
I know, thank God.
Benny Morris
They believe that they are killing Hamas snakes. They’re given certain objectives and that’s what they attack. And if the Hamas is hiding behind civilians, civilians die. Simple as that-
They believe that they are killing Hamas snakes. They’re given certain objectives and that’s what they attack. And if the Hamas is hiding behind civilians, civilians die. Simple as that-
Norman Finkelstein
Every time they target a kid, I’m sure they believe it’s Hamas.
Every time they target a kid, I’m sure they believe it’s Hamas.
Benny Morris
[inaudible 02:44:53]
[inaudible 02:44:53]
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah. When they killed the four kids on the…
Yeah. When they killed the four kids on the…
Benny Morris
They believed that they were Hamas snakes-
They believed that they were Hamas snakes-
Norman Finkelstein
I know they believed it. Even though they were diminutive size, even though they were [inaudible 02:45:03]
I know they believed it. Even though they were diminutive size, even though they were [inaudible 02:45:03]
Benny Morris
You know from that angle, you don’t see the sides-
You know from that angle, you don’t see the sides-
Norman Finkelstein
No, they saw the sides, but let’s see the side-
No, they saw the sides, but let’s see the side-
Steven Bonnell
Oh, I know what he’s quoting, correct, but you’ve lied about this particular instance in the past. Those kids weren’t just on the beaches as often stated in articles. Those kids were literally coming out of a previously identified Hamas compound that they had operated from. They literally-
Oh, I know what he’s quoting, correct, but you’ve lied about this particular instance in the past. Those kids weren’t just on the beaches as often stated in articles. Those kids were literally coming out of a previously identified Hamas compound that they had operated from. They literally-
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Borelli-
Mr. Borelli-
Steven Bonnell
You could Google it, Mr. Finkel-stinker-
You could Google it, Mr. Finkel-stinker-
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Borelli, with all due respect, you’re such a fantastic moron, it’s terrifying. That wharf was filled with journalists. There were scores of journalists. That was an old fisherman’s shack. What are you talking about? It’s so painful to listen to this idiocy-
Mr. Borelli, with all due respect, you’re such a fantastic moron, it’s terrifying. That wharf was filled with journalists. There were scores of journalists. That was an old fisherman’s shack. What are you talking about? It’s so painful to listen to this idiocy-
Steven Bonnell
And to be clear, on the other side, you’re implying that the strike was okayed on the Israeli side where they said, “We’re just going to kill four Palestinian people today for no reason.”
And to be clear, on the other side, you’re implying that the strike was okayed on the Israeli side where they said, “We’re just going to kill four Palestinian people today for no reason.”
Norman Finkelstein
Hey-
Hey-
Benny Morris
Do you believe that?
Do you believe that?
Steven Bonnell
Do you believe that? Do you believe that? [inaudible 02:45:57] journalists, do you think that [inaudible 02:46:00]
Do you believe that? Do you believe that? [inaudible 02:45:57] journalists, do you think that [inaudible 02:46:00]
Norman Finkelstein
Here we go-
Here we go-
Benny Morris
That they would actually kill four children?
That they would actually kill four children?
Steven Bonnell
He went answer the question-
He went answer the question-
Norman Finkelstein
Here we go-
Here we go-
Steven Bonnell
He will never answer that question.
He will never answer that question.
Norman Finkelstein
I will answer the question-
I will answer the question-
Benny Morris
The pilots were out to kill four children-
The pilots were out to kill four children-
Norman Finkelstein
I will even answer the moron’s questions-
I will even answer the moron’s questions-
Steven Bonnell
Because that was a strike, that was a drone strike, so that was approved all the way up the chain that we’re going to kill children today. We’re going to kill Palestinian children today-
Because that was a strike, that was a drone strike, so that was approved all the way up the chain that we’re going to kill children today. We’re going to kill Palestinian children today-
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, you want me to answer or do you want your motormouth to go? Okay, answer. In 2018, there was the Great March of Return in Gaza by all reckonings of human rights organizations and journalists who were there. It was overwhelmingly nonviolent-
Okay, you want me to answer or do you want your motormouth to go? Okay, answer. In 2018, there was the Great March of Return in Gaza by all reckonings of human rights organizations and journalists who were there. It was overwhelmingly nonviolent-
Benny Morris
And organized by the Hamas.
And organized by the Hamas.
Norman Finkelstein
Whoever organized it-
Whoever organized it-
Mouin Rabbani
It was organized by Satan, let’s start with that-
It was organized by Satan, let’s start with that-
Norman Finkelstein
Satan-
Satan-
Benny Morris
No, by Hamas-
No, by Hamas-
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, Satan. I agree. Let’s go for the big one, the big magilla. It’s Satan, okay. Overwhelmingly non-violent. Resembled at the beginning the First Intifada-
Okay, Satan. I agree. Let’s go for the big one, the big magilla. It’s Satan, okay. Overwhelmingly non-violent. Resembled at the beginning the First Intifada-
Benny Morris
They threw bombs here and there.
They threw bombs here and there.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, not bombs, but-
Okay, not bombs, but-
Benny Morris
They tried to make holes in the fence, obviously-
They tried to make holes in the fence, obviously-
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, let’s continue.
Okay, let’s continue.
Benny Morris
Yeah.
Yeah.
Norman Finkelstein
So-
So-
Benny Morris
But I’m not sure Israel behaved morally in that respect.
But I’m not sure Israel behaved morally in that respect.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay-
Okay-
Benny Morris
No, no, no-
No, no, no-
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, wait, wait, wait-
Okay, wait, wait, wait-
Benny Morris
I’m willing to grant you that.
I’m willing to grant you that.
Norman Finkelstein
Please, please. Allow me to-
Please, please. Allow me to-
Benny Morris
You don’t have to pursue it because I’m willing to grant-
You don’t have to pursue it because I’m willing to grant-
Norman Finkelstein
Allow me to finish-
Allow me to finish-
Mouin Rabbani
I don’t know anything about this. I’d like to hear.
I don’t know anything about this. I’d like to hear.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. So as you know, along the Gaza perimeter, there was Israel’s best-trained snipers. Correct?
Okay. So as you know, along the Gaza perimeter, there was Israel’s best-trained snipers. Correct?
Benny Morris
I don’t know best-trained. There was snipers-
I don’t know best-trained. There was snipers-
Norman Finkelstein
Fine. Okay. All right. Because… Hey, laugh. It’s hilarious. This story’s so funny-
Fine. Okay. All right. Because… Hey, laugh. It’s hilarious. This story’s so funny-
Steven Bonnell
You’re lying. The Great March of Return had aspects of violence to it. Even the UN says it themselves.
You’re lying. The Great March of Return had aspects of violence to it. Even the UN says it themselves.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, okay, okay.
Okay, okay, okay.
Steven Bonnell
But you only collect what the UN says that you like.
But you only collect what the UN says that you like.
Norman Finkelstein
You see the problem, Mr. Morelli, is, you don’t know the English language. You don’t-
You see the problem, Mr. Morelli, is, you don’t know the English language. You don’t-
Steven Bonnell
I can read from the UN website itself. In regards to the Great March of Return, they said, “While the vast majority of protestors have acted in a peaceful manner, during most protests dozens have approached the fence attempting to damage it, burning fires, throwing stones and Molotov cocktails towards Israeli forces, and flying incendiary kites and balloons into Israeli territory. The latter resulted in extensive damage to agricultural land and nature reserves inside Israel and risked the lives of Israeli civilians. Some incidents of shooting and throwing of explosives also reported-“
I can read from the UN website itself. In regards to the Great March of Return, they said, “While the vast majority of protestors have acted in a peaceful manner, during most protests dozens have approached the fence attempting to damage it, burning fires, throwing stones and Molotov cocktails towards Israeli forces, and flying incendiary kites and balloons into Israeli territory. The latter resulted in extensive damage to agricultural land and nature reserves inside Israel and risked the lives of Israeli civilians. Some incidents of shooting and throwing of explosives also reported-“
Norman Finkelstein
Talk Fast. Talk fast so people think that you’re coherent-
Talk Fast. Talk fast so people think that you’re coherent-
Steven Bonnell
I’m just reading from the UN-
I’m just reading from the UN-
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah, but you’re saying-
Yeah, but you’re saying-
Steven Bonnell
I know you like them sometimes, only when they agree with you though.
I know you like them sometimes, only when they agree with you though.
Norman Finkelstein
You got the months wrong. You got the months wrong. We’re talking about the beginning in March 30th to what-
You got the months wrong. You got the months wrong. We’re talking about the beginning in March 30th to what-
Steven Bonnell
You just described that march as mostly peaceful.
You just described that march as mostly peaceful.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, allow me to finish. So there were the snipers, okay. Now, you find it so far-fetched. Israelis purposely, deliberately targeting civilians? That’s such a far-fetched idea. An overwhelmingly nonviolent march. What did the international investigation-
Okay, allow me to finish. So there were the snipers, okay. Now, you find it so far-fetched. Israelis purposely, deliberately targeting civilians? That’s such a far-fetched idea. An overwhelmingly nonviolent march. What did the international investigation-
Benny Morris
It wasn’t the march. It was a campaign which went on for months.
It wasn’t the march. It was a campaign which went on for months.
Norman Finkelstein
Whatever you want to call it, yeah. What did the UN investigation find? It found-
Whatever you want to call it, yeah. What did the UN investigation find? It found-
Benny Morris
Well, he just read it for you.
Well, he just read it for you.
Norman Finkelstein
I read the report. I don’t read things off of those machines. I read the report. What did it find? Brace yourself. You thought it was so funny, the idea of IDF targeting civilians. It found… Go look this up on your machine-
I read the report. I don’t read things off of those machines. I read the report. What did it find? Brace yourself. You thought it was so funny, the idea of IDF targeting civilians. It found… Go look this up on your machine-
Steven Bonnell
I already know what you’re going to say. You’re going to say it found that only one or two of them were justified killings-
I already know what you’re going to say. You’re going to say it found that only one or two of them were justified killings-
Norman Finkelstein
It targeted children, targeted journalists, targeted medics. And here’s the funniest one of all, it’s so hilarious, they targeted disabled people who were 300 meters away from the fence and just standing by trees-
It targeted children, targeted journalists, targeted medics. And here’s the funniest one of all, it’s so hilarious, they targeted disabled people who were 300 meters away from the fence and just standing by trees-
Benny Morris
If this is true, if what you’re saying is true-
If this is true, if what you’re saying is true-
Lex Fridman
Just a quick pause. I think everything was fascinating to listen to except the mention of hilarious. Nobody finds any of this hilarious, and if any of us are laughing, it’s not at the suffering of-
Just a quick pause. I think everything was fascinating to listen to except the mention of hilarious. Nobody finds any of this hilarious, and if any of us are laughing, it’s not at the suffering of-
Norman Finkelstein
[inaudible 02:50:00].
[inaudible 02:50:00].
Lex Fridman
And if any of us are laughing, it’s not at the suffering of civilians or suffering of anyone, it’s at the obvious joyful comradery in the room, so I’m enjoying it, and also the joy of learning, so thank you.
And if any of us are laughing, it’s not at the suffering of civilians or suffering of anyone, it’s at the obvious joyful comradery in the room, so I’m enjoying it, and also the joy of learning, so thank you.
Steven Bonnell
Can we talk about the targeting civilian thing a little bit? I think there’s an important underlying-
Can we talk about the targeting civilian thing a little bit? I think there’s an important underlying-
Lex Fridman
[Inaudible 02:50:18].
[Inaudible 02:50:18].
Steven Bonnell
I think it’s important to understand there’s three different things here that we need to think about. So, one is a policy of killing civilians. So, I would ask the other side, I’m going to ask all three, because I know there won’t be a short answer, do you think there is a policy, top down from the IDF to target civilians? That’s one thing-
I think it’s important to understand there’s three different things here that we need to think about. So, one is a policy of killing civilians. So, I would ask the other side, I’m going to ask all three, because I know there won’t be a short answer, do you think there is a policy, top down from the IDF to target civilians? That’s one thing-
Mouin Rabbani
Yes.
Yes.
Steven Bonnell
… A second thing is-
… A second thing is-
Benny Morris
He said yes.
He said yes.
Steven Bonnell
I’ll write that down.
I’ll write that down.
Benny Morris
Mouin answered yes.
Mouin answered yes.
Steven Bonnell
That’s fine, but then the second thing is, or there’s two distinctions I want to draw between. I think Benny would say this, I would say this. I’m sure, undoubtedly, there have been cases where IDF soldiers, for no good reason, have targeted and killed Palestinians that they should not have done, that would be prosecutable as war crimes as defined by the [inaudible 02:50:56]-
That’s fine, but then the second thing is, or there’s two distinctions I want to draw between. I think Benny would say this, I would say this. I’m sure, undoubtedly, there have been cases where IDF soldiers, for no good reason, have targeted and killed Palestinians that they should not have done, that would be prosecutable as war crimes as defined by the [inaudible 02:50:56]-
Benny Morris
And some have been prosecuted.
And some have been prosecuted.
Steven Bonnell
And I’m absolutely sure-
And I’m absolutely sure-
Norman Finkelstein
According to you and your book, practically none.
According to you and your book, practically none.
Steven Bonnell
I’m sure that we would all agree for soldiers that that happens, but I think that it’s important that when we talk about military strikes or we talk about things especially involving bombings or drone attacks, these are things that are signed off by multiple different layers of command, by multiple people involved in an operation, including intelligence gathering, including weaponeering, and they also have typically lawyers involved. When you make the claim that an IDF soldier shot a Palestinian, those three people, the three hostages that came up with white flags, that something horrible happened, I think that’s a fair statement to make and I think a lot of criticism is deserved, but when you make the statement that four children were killed by a strike, the claim that you’re making-
I’m sure that we would all agree for soldiers that that happens, but I think that it’s important that when we talk about military strikes or we talk about things especially involving bombings or drone attacks, these are things that are signed off by multiple different layers of command, by multiple people involved in an operation, including intelligence gathering, including weaponeering, and they also have typically lawyers involved. When you make the claim that an IDF soldier shot a Palestinian, those three people, the three hostages that came up with white flags, that something horrible happened, I think that’s a fair statement to make and I think a lot of criticism is deserved, but when you make the statement that four children were killed by a strike, the claim that you’re making-
Norman Finkelstein
Deliberately, yeah.
Deliberately, yeah.
Steven Bonnell
The claim that you’re making is that multiple levels of the IDF signed off-
The claim that you’re making is that multiple levels of the IDF signed off-
Norman Finkelstein
I have no idea what [inaudible 02:51:47]-
I have no idea what [inaudible 02:51:47]-
Steven Bonnell
That’s great if you don’t understand the process, then let me educate you.
That’s great if you don’t understand the process, then let me educate you.
Norman Finkelstein
You don’t understand the process.
You don’t understand the process.
Steven Bonnell
I do understand the process, I’m telling you. I’m trying to explain to you right now.
I do understand the process, I’m telling you. I’m trying to explain to you right now.
Norman Finkelstein
Really? You’re in the IDF?
Really? You’re in the IDF?
Steven Bonnell
No, it’s basic-
No, it’s basic-
Norman Finkelstein
You’re studying the IDF.
You’re studying the IDF.
Steven Bonnell
You can ask anybody that talks about-
You can ask anybody that talks about-
Norman Finkelstein
Aside from Wikipedia, can you tell me what your knowledge of the IDF is?
Aside from Wikipedia, can you tell me what your knowledge of the IDF is?
Steven Bonnell
You can talk to people who work in the military-
You can talk to people who work in the military-
Norman Finkelstein
What’s your knowledge of the IDF?
What’s your knowledge of the IDF?
Steven Bonnell
Your audience can look this up. Do you think that bombing and strikes are decided by one person in the field? Do you think one person-
Your audience can look this up. Do you think that bombing and strikes are decided by one person in the field? Do you think one person-
Mouin Rabbani
Can I respond to that?
Can I respond to that?
Steven Bonnell
[inaudible 02:52:10] on a drone strike-
[inaudible 02:52:10] on a drone strike-
Benny Morris
[inaudible 02:52:11] a pilot doesn’t do it on his own.
[inaudible 02:52:11] a pilot doesn’t do it on his own.
Mouin Rabbani
Can I respond-
Can I respond-
Steven Bonnell
[inaudible 02:52:14] have entire apparatuses that are designed to figure out how to strike and who to strike, so when you say that four children are targeted, you’re saying that a whole apparatus that tries to murder-
[inaudible 02:52:14] have entire apparatuses that are designed to figure out how to strike and who to strike, so when you say that four children are targeted, you’re saying that a whole apparatus that tries to murder-
Norman Finkelstein
You made my argument better than me-
You made my argument better than me-
Steven Bonnell
… Poor Palestinian children.
… Poor Palestinian children.
Norman Finkelstein
You made my argument better than me.
You made my argument better than me.
Steven Bonnell
Which is a ridiculous argument.
Which is a ridiculous argument.
Norman Finkelstein
Oh, really? It’s impossible at the command level, but you said that they couldn’t have done it at the bottom if it weren’t also at the top.
Oh, really? It’s impossible at the command level, but you said that they couldn’t have done it at the bottom if it weren’t also at the top.
Steven Bonnell
You don’t understand the strength of the claim that you’re making. You’re saying that from a top down level, that lawyers, multiple commanders, intelligence, all these people signed off-
You don’t understand the strength of the claim that you’re making. You’re saying that from a top down level, that lawyers, multiple commanders, intelligence, all these people signed off-
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Bonnell, do not tell me what I don’t understand.
Mr. Bonnell, do not tell me what I don’t understand.
Steven Bonnell
… On killing poor Palestinians, children.
… On killing poor Palestinians, children.
Norman Finkelstein
It’s true, I don’t spend my nights on Wikipedia. I read books. I admit that as a-
It’s true, I don’t spend my nights on Wikipedia. I read books. I admit that as a-
Steven Bonnell
That’s a waste of time, by the way. You’re wasting time [inaudible 02:52:55].
That’s a waste of time, by the way. You’re wasting time [inaudible 02:52:55].
Norman Finkelstein
I know, books are a waste of time. With all due regard, they’re-
I know, books are a waste of time. With all due regard, they’re-
Steven Bonnell
Well, according to you they are. The only thing you take from them are two or three quotes that you use to push people around.
Well, according to you they are. The only thing you take from them are two or three quotes that you use to push people around.
Norman Finkelstein
I completely respect the fact… And I’ll say it on the air, as much as I find totally disgusting what’s come of your politics, a lot of the books are excellent, and I’ll even tell you because I’m not afraid of saying it, whenever I have to check on the basic fact, the equivalent of going to the Britannica, I go to your books. I know you got a lot of the facts right.
I completely respect the fact… And I’ll say it on the air, as much as I find totally disgusting what’s come of your politics, a lot of the books are excellent, and I’ll even tell you because I’m not afraid of saying it, whenever I have to check on the basic fact, the equivalent of going to the Britannica, I go to your books. I know you got a lot of the facts right.
Lex Fridman
Benny Morris’ books for the listener.
Benny Morris’ books for the listener.
Norman Finkelstein
I would never say books are a waste of time and it’s regrettable to you that you got strapped with a partner who thinks that all the wisdom-
I would never say books are a waste of time and it’s regrettable to you that you got strapped with a partner who thinks that all the wisdom-
Benny Morris
He didn’t say they’re a waste of time.
He didn’t say they’re a waste of time.
Mouin Rabbani
I’d like to respond to what you were saying. I think the question that we’re trying to answer-
I’d like to respond to what you were saying. I think the question that we’re trying to answer-
Benny Morris
I think you don’t understand Israel, you know? Neither of you really understands Israel and how it works.
I think you don’t understand Israel, you know? Neither of you really understands Israel and how it works.
Mouin Rabbani
Let me finish, please. I think we’re all agreed that Palestinians have deliberately targeted civilians. Whether we’re talking about Hamas and Islamic jihad today or previously-
Let me finish, please. I think we’re all agreed that Palestinians have deliberately targeted civilians. Whether we’re talking about Hamas and Islamic jihad today or previously-
Benny Morris
I prefer the word murdered and raped rather than targeted. Targeted is too soft for what the Hamas did.
I prefer the word murdered and raped rather than targeted. Targeted is too soft for what the Hamas did.
Steven Bonnell
I’m okay with it.
I’m okay with it.
Mouin Rabbani
I’m not talking about-
I’m not talking about-
Benny Morris
I’m talking about this now.
I’m talking about this now.
Mouin Rabbani
Yeah, but I’m trying to answer his question. Historically, there is substantial evidence that Palestinians have targeted civilians, whether it’s been incidental or systematic is a different discussion, I don’t want to get into that now. For some reason, there seems to be a huge debate about whether any Israeli has ever sunk so low as to target a civilian. I don’t-
Yeah, but I’m trying to answer his question. Historically, there is substantial evidence that Palestinians have targeted civilians, whether it’s been incidental or systematic is a different discussion, I don’t want to get into that now. For some reason, there seems to be a huge debate about whether any Israeli has ever sunk so low as to target a civilian. I don’t-
Benny Morris
No, we’ve agreed. We’ve both said.
No, we’ve agreed. We’ve both said.
Steven Bonnell
We just agreed [inaudible 02:54:50].
We just agreed [inaudible 02:54:50].
Benny Morris
I just said that this has happened here and there. We’ve agreed on that. What we’re saying is it’s not policy, which is what you guys are implying, that they kill civilians deliberately.
I just said that this has happened here and there. We’ve agreed on that. What we’re saying is it’s not policy, which is what you guys are implying, that they kill civilians deliberately.
Mouin Rabbani
If I understand you correctly, you’re basically making the claim that none of these attacks could have happened without going through an entire chain of commands.
If I understand you correctly, you’re basically making the claim that none of these attacks could have happened without going through an entire chain of commands.
Steven Bonnell
For strike cells that are involved in drone attacks or plane attacks or-
For strike cells that are involved in drone attacks or plane attacks or-
Mouin Rabbani
Yeah.
Yeah.
Steven Bonnell
Yes [inaudible 02:55:13].
Yes [inaudible 02:55:13].
Mouin Rabbani
My understanding of the Israeli military, and you could perhaps… You’ve served in it, you would know better, it’s actually a fairly chaotic organization.
My understanding of the Israeli military, and you could perhaps… You’ve served in it, you would know better, it’s actually a fairly chaotic organization.
Benny Morris
No, that’s not true, especially not the Air Force, extremely, extremely organized. The Air Force works in a very organized fashion, as he says, with lawyers, a chain of command, and ultimately the pilot drops the bomb where he is told to drop it.
No, that’s not true, especially not the Air Force, extremely, extremely organized. The Air Force works in a very organized fashion, as he says, with lawyers, a chain of command, and ultimately the pilot drops the bomb where he is told to drop it.
Steven Bonnell
Protective Edge, was that 200 strikes in like 60 seconds, I think, the opening of Protective Edge? The coordination between [inaudible 02:55:43]-
Protective Edge, was that 200 strikes in like 60 seconds, I think, the opening of Protective Edge? The coordination between [inaudible 02:55:43]-
Mouin Rabbani
You’re talking about 2008.
You’re talking about 2008.
Steven Bonnell
I think Protective Edge was 2014, but I’m just saying that the coordination in the military is pretty tight.
I think Protective Edge was 2014, but I’m just saying that the coordination in the military is pretty tight.
Mouin Rabbani
Well, my understanding of the Israeli military-
Well, my understanding of the Israeli military-
Benny Morris
It’s very organized.
It’s very organized.
Mouin Rabbani
… Is that it’s quite chaotic and there’s also a lot of testimonies from Israel, but be that as it may, I’m prepared to accept both of your contentions that it’s a highly organized and disciplined force. Air Force under any scenario is going to be more organized than the other branches, and you’re saying such a strike would’ve been inconceivable.
… Is that it’s quite chaotic and there’s also a lot of testimonies from Israel, but be that as it may, I’m prepared to accept both of your contentions that it’s a highly organized and disciplined force. Air Force under any scenario is going to be more organized than the other branches, and you’re saying such a strike would’ve been inconceivable.
Steven Bonnell
Well, I’m not necessarily saying inconceivable. I’m saying that that would’ve required murderous intent on so many different levels. I don’t think good evidence has been presented to say that that’s-
Well, I’m not necessarily saying inconceivable. I’m saying that that would’ve required murderous intent on so many different levels. I don’t think good evidence has been presented to say that that’s-
Mouin Rabbani
Your basic claim is that it would be fair to assume that such a strike could have only been carried out with multiple levels of authorization and signing off. Let’s accept that for the sake of argument. We have now seen incident after incident after incident after incident where entire families are vaporized in single strikes-
Your basic claim is that it would be fair to assume that such a strike could have only been carried out with multiple levels of authorization and signing off. Let’s accept that for the sake of argument. We have now seen incident after incident after incident after incident where entire families are vaporized in single strikes-
Benny Morris
Who is in the families? Who lives in the house inside-
Who is in the families? Who lives in the house inside-
Mouin Rabbani
Family members.
Family members.
Benny Morris
No, next to the house in which these families are killed?
No, next to the house in which these families are killed?
Mouin Rabbani
We have seen incident-
We have seen incident-
Benny Morris
Do you know that Hamas [inaudible 02:57:02] weren’t in that house? Do you know that their ammunition dumps weren’t in those houses?
Do you know that Hamas [inaudible 02:57:02] weren’t in that house? Do you know that their ammunition dumps weren’t in those houses?
Mouin Rabbani
Why do I have to prove a negative?
Why do I have to prove a negative?
Benny Morris
You are saying that they deliberately targeted families. If Israel wanted to kill civilians in Gaza, they could have killed 500,000 by now with the number of strikes they’ve done and the fact that they’ve only killed a certain small number [inaudible 02:57:22]-
You are saying that they deliberately targeted families. If Israel wanted to kill civilians in Gaza, they could have killed 500,000 by now with the number of strikes they’ve done and the fact that they’ve only killed a certain small number [inaudible 02:57:22]-
Mouin Rabbani
30,000 is a small number?
30,000 is a small number?
Benny Morris
Small number in proportion-
Small number in proportion-
Mouin Rabbani
You consider 30,000 a small number?
You consider 30,000 a small number?
Benny Morris
Small number in proportion over four months probably is an indication that-
Small number in proportion over four months probably is an indication that-
Norman Finkelstein
12,000 children is only.
12,000 children is only.
Benny Morris
… Is targeted and that there are Hamas targets in these places.
… Is targeted and that there are Hamas targets in these places.
Norman Finkelstein
12,000 children is only, and if that’s the case, why is it-
12,000 children is only, and if that’s the case, why is it-
Benny Morris
Did I use the word only?
Did I use the word only?
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah, you said only. Professor Morris, here’s a question for you, if we take every combat zone in the world for the past three years, every combat zone in the world-
Yeah, you said only. Professor Morris, here’s a question for you, if we take every combat zone in the world for the past three years, every combat zone in the world-
Benny Morris
In Vietnam, the Americans killed 1 million people.
In Vietnam, the Americans killed 1 million people.
Mouin Rabbani
Well, the [inaudible 02:57:58] killed 40 million.
Well, the [inaudible 02:57:58] killed 40 million.
Norman Finkelstein
I was in the anti-war movement, so don’t strap me-
I was in the anti-war movement, so don’t strap me-
Benny Morris
The Americans killed 1 million people in Vietnam.
The Americans killed 1 million people in Vietnam.
Norman Finkelstein
Fine, and 30 million Russians were killed during World War II, so everything else is irrelevant.
Fine, and 30 million Russians were killed during World War II, so everything else is irrelevant.
Benny Morris
[inaudible 02:58:13].
[inaudible 02:58:13].
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris, here’s a question, it’s very perplexing. If you take every combat zone in the world for the past three years and you multiply the number of children killed by four, every combat zone in the world, you get Gaza. So when you say-
Professor Morris, here’s a question, it’s very perplexing. If you take every combat zone in the world for the past three years and you multiply the number of children killed by four, every combat zone in the world, you get Gaza. So when you say-
Steven Bonnell
What is that supposed to prove?
What is that supposed to prove?
Norman Finkelstein
I’m going to tell you… Just shut up
I’m going to tell you… Just shut up
Benny Morris
Firstly, you’re lying on Hamas numbers.
Firstly, you’re lying on Hamas numbers.
Norman Finkelstein
No, I’m not lying [inaudible 02:58:44]-
No, I’m not lying [inaudible 02:58:44]-
Benny Morris
Hamas numbers are not necessarily true.
Hamas numbers are not necessarily true.
Norman Finkelstein
… The numbers that everybody else… I’m lying in the numbers [inaudible 02:58:47]-
… The numbers that everybody else… I’m lying in the numbers [inaudible 02:58:47]-
Steven Bonnell
Even if we take the numbers though, what does that prove?
Even if we take the numbers though, what does that prove?
Benny Morris
Those are Hamas numbers, which may not be true. They could invent anything because you know that they are a mendacious organization.
Those are Hamas numbers, which may not be true. They could invent anything because you know that they are a mendacious organization.
Norman Finkelstein
I know mendacious, believe me-
I know mendacious, believe me-
Benny Morris
You like the word mendacious?
You like the word mendacious?
Norman Finkelstein
Mendacious as in the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. So here’s the thing, you say they could have killed 500,000, but they only killed, only, that’s your words, they only killed 30,000.
Mendacious as in the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. So here’s the thing, you say they could have killed 500,000, but they only killed, only, that’s your words, they only killed 30,000.
Benny Morris
You believe that they deliberately target civilians, they would’ve killed many, many more. The fact is that they don’t deliberately target civilians.
You believe that they deliberately target civilians, they would’ve killed many, many more. The fact is that they don’t deliberately target civilians.
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris, for [inaudible 02:59:24]-
Professor Morris, for [inaudible 02:59:24]-
Benny Morris
And you don’t understand Israeli society.
And you don’t understand Israeli society.
Norman Finkelstein
I don’t want to understand Israeli society.
I don’t want to understand Israeli society.
Benny Morris
You don’t want the truth.
You don’t want the truth.
Norman Finkelstein
I don’t want to. I D.dOn’t want to get inside their heads.
I don’t want to. I D.dOn’t want to get inside their heads.
Benny Morris
That’s the problem.
That’s the problem.
Steven Bonnell
[inaudible 02:59:33].
[inaudible 02:59:33].
Norman Finkelstein
90%-
90%-
Benny Morris
A good historian tries to get into the heads of-
A good historian tries to get into the heads of-
Norman Finkelstein
There’s a limit.
There’s a limit.
Benny Morris
… The various protagonists.
… The various protagonists.
Norman Finkelstein
There’s a limit.
There’s a limit.
Benny Morris
A good historian does.
A good historian does.
Norman Finkelstein
When 90% of Israelis think that Israel’s using enough or too little force in Gaza, I don’t want to get inside that head. 40% think that Israel is using insufficient force in Gaza. I don’t want to get inside that head. I don’t want to get inside the head of people who think they’re using insufficient force against the population, half of which is children. I don’t want to get inside that head, but here’s the point, because your partner wants to know the point. You don’t understand political constraints. One of your ministers said, “Let’s drop an atomic bomb on Gaza.”
When 90% of Israelis think that Israel’s using enough or too little force in Gaza, I don’t want to get inside that head. 40% think that Israel is using insufficient force in Gaza. I don’t want to get inside that head. I don’t want to get inside the head of people who think they’re using insufficient force against the population, half of which is children. I don’t want to get inside that head, but here’s the point, because your partner wants to know the point. You don’t understand political constraints. One of your ministers said, “Let’s drop an atomic bomb on Gaza.”
Benny Morris
You think he really meant that?
You think he really meant that?
Mouin Rabbani
He said it three times.
He said it three times.
Benny Morris
No, no, no, it was said in a sort of a very questionable way. He didn’t say they should drop an atomic bomb.
No, no, no, it was said in a sort of a very questionable way. He didn’t say they should drop an atomic bomb.
Mouin Rabbani
He said it the day after the ICJ met.
He said it the day after the ICJ met.
Benny Morris
This minister is a messianic idiot, but he didn’t say drop an atomic bomb [inaudible 03:00:43].
This minister is a messianic idiot, but he didn’t say drop an atomic bomb [inaudible 03:00:43].
Mouin Rabbani
He said it [inaudible 03:00:44].
He said it [inaudible 03:00:44].
Norman Finkelstein
None other Israel’s chief historian, the justifiably famed Benny Morris, thinks we should be dropping nuclear weapons on Iran.
None other Israel’s chief historian, the justifiably famed Benny Morris, thinks we should be dropping nuclear weapons on Iran.
Benny Morris
Iran, its leaders for years have said, “We should destroy Israel.” Do you agree with that? They’ve said, “We should destroy Israel. Israel must be destroyed.” Is that correct? This is what the Iranian leaders have been saying since Khomeini.
Iran, its leaders for years have said, “We should destroy Israel.” Do you agree with that? They’ve said, “We should destroy Israel. Israel must be destroyed.” Is that correct? This is what the Iranian leaders have been saying since Khomeini.
Norman Finkelstein
I would say Iranian leaders have sent mixed messages.
I would say Iranian leaders have sent mixed messages.
Benny Morris
But some of them have said, including Khamenei-
But some of them have said, including Khamenei-
Norman Finkelstein
If you don’t know the evidence, why are you laughing?
If you don’t know the evidence, why are you laughing?
Steven Bonnell
The slightest skepticism, it’s very funny.
The slightest skepticism, it’s very funny.
Norman Finkelstein
It’s funny because-
It’s funny because-
Steven Bonnell
Iran that supports Hezbollah and the Houthis and Hamas, maybe they want Israel destroyed.
Iran that supports Hezbollah and the Houthis and Hamas, maybe they want Israel destroyed.
Norman Finkelstein
Brace yourself to the extent that the Houthis are trying to stop the genocide in Gaza, I support-
Brace yourself to the extent that the Houthis are trying to stop the genocide in Gaza, I support-
Steven Bonnell
[inaudible 03:01:37] ships. I know I selectively support international law when it agrees with you and then when it doesn’t, you decide to throw international law to the wind.
[inaudible 03:01:37] ships. I know I selectively support international law when it agrees with you and then when it doesn’t, you decide to throw international law to the wind.
Benny Morris
There’s no genocide in Gaza.
There’s no genocide in Gaza.
Norman Finkelstein
If you like [inaudible 03:01:46]-
If you like [inaudible 03:01:46]-
Lex Fridman
Hold on a second. Norm, Norm-
Hold on a second. Norm, Norm-
Norman Finkelstein
Let me read what you said-
Let me read what you said-
Lex Fridman
Norm, Norm, stop, please. Norm, just for me, please. Just give me a second. You said there’s no genocide going on in Gaza. Let me ask that clear question. The same question I asked on the Hamas attacks. Is there, from a legal, philosophical, moral perspective, is there genocide going on in Gaza today?
Norm, Norm, stop, please. Norm, just for me, please. Just give me a second. You said there’s no genocide going on in Gaza. Let me ask that clear question. The same question I asked on the Hamas attacks. Is there, from a legal, philosophical, moral perspective, is there genocide going on in Gaza today?
Gaza
Mouin Rabbani
Is there a genocide going on in Gaza? Well, in several years we will have a definitive response to that question. What has happened thus far is that on the 29th of December, the Republic of South Africa instituted proceedings against Israel, pursuant to the 1948 convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide. South Africa basically accused Israel of perpetrating genocide in the Gaza Strip. On the 26th of January, the court issued its initial ruling. The court at this stage is not making a determination on whether Israel has or has not committed genocide. So, just as it has not found Israel guilty, it certainly also hasn’t found Israel innocent. What the court had to do at this stage was take one of two decisions, either South Africa’s case was the equivalent of a frivolous lawsuit and dismiss it and close the proceedings, or it had to determine that South Africa presented a plausible case that Israel was violating its obligations under the genocide convention and that it would on that basis hold a full hearing.
Is there a genocide going on in Gaza? Well, in several years we will have a definitive response to that question. What has happened thus far is that on the 29th of December, the Republic of South Africa instituted proceedings against Israel, pursuant to the 1948 convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide. South Africa basically accused Israel of perpetrating genocide in the Gaza Strip. On the 26th of January, the court issued its initial ruling. The court at this stage is not making a determination on whether Israel has or has not committed genocide. So, just as it has not found Israel guilty, it certainly also hasn’t found Israel innocent. What the court had to do at this stage was take one of two decisions, either South Africa’s case was the equivalent of a frivolous lawsuit and dismiss it and close the proceedings, or it had to determine that South Africa presented a plausible case that Israel was violating its obligations under the genocide convention and that it would on that basis hold a full hearing.
Now, a lot of people have looked at the court’s ruling of the 26th of January and focused on the fact that the court did not order a ceasefire. I actually wasn’t expecting it to order a ceasefire, and I wasn’t surprised that it didn’t because in the other cases that the court has considered, most prominently Bosnia and Myanmar, it also didn’t order a ceasefire, and South Africa in requesting a ceasefire also didn’t ask the court to render an opinion on the legitimacy, or lack thereof, of Israel’s military operation. From my perspective, the key issue on the 26th of January was whether the court would simply dismiss the case or decide to proceed with it.
Benny Morris
And it decided to proceed [inaudible 03:04:35]-
And it decided to proceed [inaudible 03:04:35]-
Mouin Rabbani
And I think that’s enormously-
And I think that’s enormously-
Norman Finkelstein
I thought that was beautifully [inaudible 03:04:39]-
I thought that was beautifully [inaudible 03:04:39]-
Benny Morris
But you said they committed genocide. You already said they committed genocide. Israel is committing genocide.
But you said they committed genocide. You already said they committed genocide. Israel is committing genocide.
Mouin Rabbani
But if I can just-
But if I can just-
Norman Finkelstein
Allow me-
Allow me-
Benny Morris
You used that word.
You used that word.
Norman Finkelstein
That’s correct. I don’t run away from my words.
That’s correct. I don’t run away from my words.
Benny Morris
So Norman, you did say Israel was committing genocide.
So Norman, you did say Israel was committing genocide.
Lex Fridman
Norm, can you let Mouin finish?
Norm, can you let Mouin finish?
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah.
Yeah.
Mouin Rabbani
Well, the end of the story is you specifically asked whether I think Israel is committing genocide. I explained formally there is no finding and as you said, we won’t know for a number of years and I think there’s legitimate questions to be raised. In the Bosnia case, which I think all four of us would agree was clearly a case of genocide, the court determined-
Well, the end of the story is you specifically asked whether I think Israel is committing genocide. I explained formally there is no finding and as you said, we won’t know for a number of years and I think there’s legitimate questions to be raised. In the Bosnia case, which I think all four of us would agree was clearly a case of genocide, the court determined-
Benny Morris
You mean by the Serbs?
You mean by the Serbs?
Mouin Rabbani
Yes. In the Bosnia case, the court determined that of all the evidence placed before them only Srebrenica qualified as genocide and all the other atrocities committed did not qualify as genocide. International law is a developing organism. I don’t know how the court is going to respond in this case, so I wouldn’t take it as a foregone conclusion how the court is going to respond, but-
Yes. In the Bosnia case, the court determined that of all the evidence placed before them only Srebrenica qualified as genocide and all the other atrocities committed did not qualify as genocide. International law is a developing organism. I don’t know how the court is going to respond in this case, so I wouldn’t take it as a foregone conclusion how the court is going to respond, but-
Benny Morris
Norman has determined already.
Norman has determined already.
Mouin Rabbani
I have too, because you’re asking my personal opinion.
I have too, because you’re asking my personal opinion.
Lex Fridman
Personal opinion is [inaudible 03:05:50].
Personal opinion is [inaudible 03:05:50].
Mouin Rabbani
So as a matter of law, I want to state very clearly it has not been determined and won’t be determined for several years. Based on my observations and the evidence before me, I would say it’s indisputable that Israel is engaged in a genocidal assault against the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip.
So as a matter of law, I want to state very clearly it has not been determined and won’t be determined for several years. Based on my observations and the evidence before me, I would say it’s indisputable that Israel is engaged in a genocidal assault against the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip.
Benny Morris
Which is a PLO line.
Which is a PLO line.
Norman Finkelstein
Get with the program, the PLO is long passed.
Get with the program, the PLO is long passed.
Benny Morris
Okay, the Palestinian authority.
Okay, the Palestinian authority.
Mouin Rabbani
As you were saying, genocide is not a body count. Genocide consists of two elements, the destruction of a people in whole or in part, so in other words, you can commit genocide by killing 30,000 people.
As you were saying, genocide is not a body count. Genocide consists of two elements, the destruction of a people in whole or in part, so in other words, you can commit genocide by killing 30,000 people.
Benny Morris
[inaudible 03:06:39].
[inaudible 03:06:39].
Mouin Rabbani
Well, five probably is below threshold.
Well, five probably is below threshold.
Benny Morris
There is a problem of numbers.
There is a problem of numbers.
Mouin Rabbani
Yes, but I think 30,000 crosses the threshold and not reaching 500,000 is probably irrelevant, and the second element is there has to be an intent. In other words-
Yes, but I think 30,000 crosses the threshold and not reaching 500,000 is probably irrelevant, and the second element is there has to be an intent. In other words-
Benny Morris
And you believe there’s an intent?
And you believe there’s an intent?
Mouin Rabbani
Yes. I think if there is any other plausible reason for why all these people are being murdered, it’s not genocide. And as far as intent to [inaudible 03:07:06]-
Yes. I think if there is any other plausible reason for why all these people are being murdered, it’s not genocide. And as far as intent to [inaudible 03:07:06]-
Benny Morris
What about hiding behind a human shield? You don’t think that’s a reason for them being killed?
What about hiding behind a human shield? You don’t think that’s a reason for them being killed?
Mouin Rabbani
Well, let’s get the intent part out of the way first. South Africa’s-
Well, let’s get the intent part out of the way first. South Africa’s-
Benny Morris
Forget South Africa, they don’t [inaudible 03:07:16]-
Forget South Africa, they don’t [inaudible 03:07:16]-
Mouin Rabbani
I’d like to finish.
I’d like to finish.
Benny Morris
Hamas government, that’s got nothing to do with anything.
Hamas government, that’s got nothing to do with anything.
Mouin Rabbani
I think they’re pro-Satan as well, last time I checked.
I think they’re pro-Satan as well, last time I checked.
Benny Morris
No, they pro-Hamas.
No, they pro-Hamas.
Mouin Rabbani
For some reason, you don’t have a problem with people being pro-Israeli at the time of this, but if they support Palestinians’ right to life or self-determination, they get demonized and de-legitimized as pro-Hamas?
For some reason, you don’t have a problem with people being pro-Israeli at the time of this, but if they support Palestinians’ right to life or self-determination, they get demonized and de-legitimized as pro-Hamas?
Benny Morris
They supported an organization which murdered 1,200 people deliberately. That’s my problem.
They supported an organization which murdered 1,200 people deliberately. That’s my problem.
Mouin Rabbani
But supporting a state that has murdered 30,000 [inaudible 03:07:45]-
But supporting a state that has murdered 30,000 [inaudible 03:07:45]-
Benny Morris
But they haven’t because these are 30,000 are basically human shields to get by the Hamas, in which the Hamas wanted killed. They wanted them killed. Hamas wanted these people killed.
But they haven’t because these are 30,000 are basically human shields to get by the Hamas, in which the Hamas wanted killed. They wanted them killed. Hamas wanted these people killed.
Mouin Rabbani
Sure, if I could just get-
Sure, if I could just get-
Benny Morris
You don’t think they wanted them killed?
You don’t think they wanted them killed?
Mouin Rabbani
No, I don’t.
No, I don’t.
Benny Morris
They didn’t provide them with shelters. They build tunnels for their fighters, but not one shelter for their own civilians.
They didn’t provide them with shelters. They build tunnels for their fighters, but not one shelter for their own civilians.
Mouin Rabbani
If I can get back to my point, you asked me about intent and the reason that I brought in the South African application is because it is actually exceptionally detailed on intent by quoting numerous-
If I can get back to my point, you asked me about intent and the reason that I brought in the South African application is because it is actually exceptionally detailed on intent by quoting numerous-
Benny Morris
All sorts of idiotic ministers in Israel.
All sorts of idiotic ministers in Israel.
Mouin Rabbani
Well, yeah, including the prime minister, the defense minister, the chief of staff-
Well, yeah, including the prime minister, the defense minister, the chief of staff-
Benny Morris
The prime minister didn’t say genocide [inaudible 03:08:27]-
The prime minister didn’t say genocide [inaudible 03:08:27]-
Norman Finkelstein
According to Asa Kasher, the philosopher of the IDF, he said that Netanyahu was vowing genocide. Now, he’s an idiot?
According to Asa Kasher, the philosopher of the IDF, he said that Netanyahu was vowing genocide. Now, he’s an idiot?
Benny Morris
I didn’t say he’s an idiot, but he’s passed it.
I didn’t say he’s an idiot, but he’s passed it.
Mouin Rabbani
So, the reason I raised the South African application is twofold. Hamas or no Hamas, it’s exceptionally detailed on the question of intent. And secondly, when the International Court of Justice issues a ruling, individual justices have the right can give their own opinion. And I found the German one to be the most interesting on this specific question because he was basically saying that he didn’t think South Africa presented a persuasive case, but he said their section on intent was so overpowering that he felt he was left with no choice but to vote with the majority. So, I think that answers the intent part of your question.
So, the reason I raised the South African application is twofold. Hamas or no Hamas, it’s exceptionally detailed on the question of intent. And secondly, when the International Court of Justice issues a ruling, individual justices have the right can give their own opinion. And I found the German one to be the most interesting on this specific question because he was basically saying that he didn’t think South Africa presented a persuasive case, but he said their section on intent was so overpowering that he felt he was left with no choice but to vote with the majority. So, I think that answers the intent part of your question.
Steven Bonnell
So, for the ICJ case that South Africa has brought, I think there’s a couple of things that need to be mentioned. One is, and I saw you two talk at length about this, the plausibility standard is incredibly low. The only thing we’re looking for is a basic presentation of facts that make it conceivable, possible that-
So, for the ICJ case that South Africa has brought, I think there’s a couple of things that need to be mentioned. One is, and I saw you two talk at length about this, the plausibility standard is incredibly low. The only thing we’re looking for is a basic presentation of facts that make it conceivable, possible that-
Mouin Rabbani
Plausible.
Plausible.
Steven Bonnell
Plausible, which legally, this is obviously below criminal conviction, below-
Plausible, which legally, this is obviously below criminal conviction, below-
Mouin Rabbani
Yes, of course. Think of it as an indictment.
Yes, of course. Think of it as an indictment.
Steven Bonnell
Sure, possibly, maybe even a lower level than even an indictment, so plausibility is an incredibly low standard, number one. Number two, if you actually go through and you read the complaint that South Africa filed, I would say that if you go through the quotes and you even follow through to the source of the quotes, the misrepresentation that South Africa does in their case about all of these horrendous quotes, in my opinion, borders on criminal.
Sure, possibly, maybe even a lower level than even an indictment, so plausibility is an incredibly low standard, number one. Number two, if you actually go through and you read the complaint that South Africa filed, I would say that if you go through the quotes and you even follow through to the source of the quotes, the misrepresentation that South Africa does in their case about all of these horrendous quotes, in my opinion, borders on criminal.
Mouin Rabbani
16 ICJ judges disagree.
16 ICJ judges disagree.
Steven Bonnell
That’s fine if 16 ICJ judges disagree, but I’m going to give-
That’s fine if 16 ICJ judges disagree, but I’m going to give-
Norman Finkelstein
They must be awfully incompetent.
They must be awfully incompetent.
Steven Bonnell
They could be.
They could be.
Norman Finkelstein
Even the American judge, she must have been awful incompetent if she was unable to see the misrepresentations that Mr. Bonnell based on his Wikipedia entry was able to find.
Even the American judge, she must have been awful incompetent if she was unable to see the misrepresentations that Mr. Bonnell based on his Wikipedia entry was able to find.
Steven Bonnell
So, this is based on the official ICJ report that was released. I’m not sure if you read the entire thing.
So, this is based on the official ICJ report that was released. I’m not sure if you read the entire thing.
Norman Finkelstein
I read every aspect.
I read every aspect.
Steven Bonnell
Did you go through and actually identify any of the sources of underlying quotes?
Did you go through and actually identify any of the sources of underlying quotes?
Norman Finkelstein
Actually, brace yourself for this and Mouin could confirm it, Yaniv Kogan, an Israeli, and Jamie Stern-Weiner, a half Israeli, they checked every single quote in the Hebrew original and Yaniv Kogan, love the guy, he has terrifying powers of concentration, he checked every single quote. Is that correct, Mouin?
Actually, brace yourself for this and Mouin could confirm it, Yaniv Kogan, an Israeli, and Jamie Stern-Weiner, a half Israeli, they checked every single quote in the Hebrew original and Yaniv Kogan, love the guy, he has terrifying powers of concentration, he checked every single quote. Is that correct, Mouin?
Mouin Rabbani
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Norman Finkelstein
And Jamie checked every single quote in the English, in the context, and where there were any contextual questions they told us.
And Jamie checked every single quote in the English, in the context, and where there were any contextual questions they told us.
Mouin Rabbani
I think they found one.
I think they found one.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah, I think they found one. So, I do not believe that those 15 judges… It was 15 to two?
Yeah, I think they found one. So, I do not believe that those 15 judges… It was 15 to two?
Mouin Rabbani
16 to two, I think.
16 to two, I think.
Norman Finkelstein
There are 15 in the court plus two, so it’s 17, so it’s 15 to two. I don’t think those 15 judges were incompetent and I certainly don’t believe the president of the court, an American, would allow herself to be duped.
There are 15 in the court plus two, so it’s 17, so it’s 15 to two. I don’t think those 15 judges were incompetent and I certainly don’t believe the president of the court, an American, would allow herself to be duped.
Steven Bonnell
Well, let me read [inaudible 03:12:19]-
Well, let me read [inaudible 03:12:19]-
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Bonnell-
Mr. Bonnell-
Lex Fridman
Hey, hey, hey, whoa, whoa, whoa, let him read.
Hey, hey, hey, whoa, whoa, whoa, let him read.
Steven Bonnell
Sure, so this was taken from the South African complaint. There’s tons of these, so here’s one. In the complaint for the ICJ they said that, “On the 12th of October, 2023, President Isaac Herzog made clear that Israel was not distinguishing between militants and civilians in Gaza, stating in a press conference to foreign media in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, over 1 million of whom are children, ‘It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible. It is not true, this rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved.'”
Sure, so this was taken from the South African complaint. There’s tons of these, so here’s one. In the complaint for the ICJ they said that, “On the 12th of October, 2023, President Isaac Herzog made clear that Israel was not distinguishing between militants and civilians in Gaza, stating in a press conference to foreign media in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, over 1 million of whom are children, ‘It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible. It is not true, this rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved.'”
Mouin Rabbani
I saw that [inaudible 03:12:58]-
I saw that [inaudible 03:12:58]-
Steven Bonnell
“It’s absolutely not true and we will fight until we break their backbone.” If you actually go to the news article that they even state, they even link it in their complaint. The full context for the quote was, “It is an entire nation out there that is responsible. It’s not true, this rhetoric about civilians not being aware, not involved, it’s absolutely not true. They could have risen up, they could have fought against that evil regime which took over Gaza in a coup d’etat, but we are at war. We are defending our homes, we are protecting our homes. That’s the truth. And when a nation protects its home, it fights and we will fight until we break their backbone.” He acknowledged that many Gazans had nothing to do with Hamas, but was adamant that others did. “I agree there are many innocent Palestinians who don’t agree with this, but you have a missile in your goddamn kitchen and you want to shoot it at me. Am I allowed to defend myself? We have to defend ourselves. We have the right to do so.”
“It’s absolutely not true and we will fight until we break their backbone.” If you actually go to the news article that they even state, they even link it in their complaint. The full context for the quote was, “It is an entire nation out there that is responsible. It’s not true, this rhetoric about civilians not being aware, not involved, it’s absolutely not true. They could have risen up, they could have fought against that evil regime which took over Gaza in a coup d’etat, but we are at war. We are defending our homes, we are protecting our homes. That’s the truth. And when a nation protects its home, it fights and we will fight until we break their backbone.” He acknowledged that many Gazans had nothing to do with Hamas, but was adamant that others did. “I agree there are many innocent Palestinians who don’t agree with this, but you have a missile in your goddamn kitchen and you want to shoot it at me. Am I allowed to defend myself? We have to defend ourselves. We have the right to do so.”
This is not the same as saying there’s no distinction between militants and civilians in Gaza. His statement here is actually fully compliant with international law to the letter because if you are storing military supplies in civilian areas, these things become military targets, and you’re allowed to do proportionality assessments afterwards. So, if this is supposed to be one of many quotes that they’ve shown that is supposed to demonstrate genocidal intent, but it is very easily explained by military intent or by a conflict between two parties-
Mouin Rabbani
I saw that press conference.
I saw that press conference.
Benny Morris
Wait, let me just say something. All of this talk is a bit irrelevant because it may sound to the listeners that the court in The Hague has ruled that Israel is committing genocide.
Wait, let me just say something. All of this talk is a bit irrelevant because it may sound to the listeners that the court in The Hague has ruled that Israel is committing genocide.
Mouin Rabbani
No, I think-
No, I think-
Benny Morris
It hasn’t. It’s just going in the next few years to look at the whole subject. There has been no determination at all. And as Steven says, some of the quotes are not exactly accurate quotes or taken out of context.
It hasn’t. It’s just going in the next few years to look at the whole subject. There has been no determination at all. And as Steven says, some of the quotes are not exactly accurate quotes or taken out of context.
Steven Bonnell
A total discharacterization.
A total discharacterization.
Benny Morris
Yes.
Yes.
Norman Finkelstein
It is correct, as Mouin put it, that’ll be several years before the court makes a determination.
It is correct, as Mouin put it, that’ll be several years before the court makes a determination.
Benny Morris
And my guess is that it’ll determine there was no genocide. That’s my guess. I’m just giving you my guess.
And my guess is that it’ll determine there was no genocide. That’s my guess. I’m just giving you my guess.
Norman Finkelstein
I can’t predict. I got it all wrong actually, as Mouin will attest, I got all wrong the first time. I never thought the American judge would vote in favor of plausibility.
I can’t predict. I got it all wrong actually, as Mouin will attest, I got all wrong the first time. I never thought the American judge would vote in favor of plausibility.
Benny Morris
So, you admit that you were wrong?
So, you admit that you were wrong?
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah, of course. I think I tell Mouin twice a day I was wrong about this and I was wrong about that. I’m not wrong about the facts. I try not to be, but my speculations, they can be wrong. Leaving that aside, first of all, as Mouin pointed out, there’s a difference between the legal decision by the ruling and an independent judgment. Now, South Africa was not filing a frivolous case. That was 84 pages. It was single-
Yeah, of course. I think I tell Mouin twice a day I was wrong about this and I was wrong about that. I’m not wrong about the facts. I try not to be, but my speculations, they can be wrong. Leaving that aside, first of all, as Mouin pointed out, there’s a difference between the legal decision by the ruling and an independent judgment. Now, South Africa was not filing a frivolous case. That was 84 pages. It was single-
Benny Morris
Even 84 pages can be frivolous.
Even 84 pages can be frivolous.
Steven Bonnell
It takes an hour and a half to read. It was not a massive case.
It takes an hour and a half to read. It was not a massive case.
Norman Finkelstein
It was single spaced and it had literally hundreds of footnotes-
It was single spaced and it had literally hundreds of footnotes-
Benny Morris
It can still be frivolous.
It can still be frivolous.
Norman Finkelstein
It’s possible.
It’s possible.
Mouin Rabbani
Of course, but this one wasn’t.
Of course, but this one wasn’t.
Norman Finkelstein
I read the report. To tell you the truth, I followed very closely everything that’s been happening to October 7th, I was mesmerized. I couldn’t believe the comprehensiveness of that particular report. Number two, there are two quite respected judges… Excuse me, there were two quite respected experts of international law sitting on the South African panel, John Dugard and Vaughan Lowe. Vaughan Lowe, as you might know, he argued the war case in 2004 before the International Court of Justice. Now, they were alleging genocide, which in their view means the evidence in their minds…
I read the report. To tell you the truth, I followed very closely everything that’s been happening to October 7th, I was mesmerized. I couldn’t believe the comprehensiveness of that particular report. Number two, there are two quite respected judges… Excuse me, there were two quite respected experts of international law sitting on the South African panel, John Dugard and Vaughan Lowe. Vaughan Lowe, as you might know, he argued the war case in 2004 before the International Court of Justice. Now, they were alleging genocide, which in their view means the evidence in their minds…
We are not yet at the court. The evidence in their minds compels the conclusion that genocide is being committed. I am willing, because I happen to know Mr. Dugard personally, and I have corresponded with Vaughan Lowe, I’ve heard their claim, I’ve read the report. I would say they make a very strong case, but let’s agree plausible. Now, here’s a question, if somebody qualifies for an Olympic team, let’s say a regional person qualifies for an Olympic team, it doesn’t mean they’re going to be on the Olympic team, it doesn’t mean they’re going to win a gold medal, a silver medal, or a bronze medal-
Benny Morris
But they can swim, that’s what you’re saying.
But they can swim, that’s what you’re saying.
Norman Finkelstein
No, I would say that’s a very high bar-
No, I would say that’s a very high bar-
Benny Morris
You’re saying they can swim.
You’re saying they can swim.
Norman Finkelstein
… To even qualify.
… To even qualify.
Mouin Rabbani
They can swim well enough to have a realistic prospect at winning a medal.
They can swim well enough to have a realistic prospect at winning a medal.
Norman Finkelstein
So, the even make it to plausible-
So, the even make it to plausible-
Steven Bonnell
That is not true. That is not what plausible means. It’s absolutely not. You’re dead wrong.
That is not true. That is not what plausible means. It’s absolutely not. You’re dead wrong.
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Berelli, please don’t teach me about the English language.
Mr. Berelli, please don’t teach me about the English language.
Steven Bonnell
So, the declaration judge [inaudible 03:17:53]-
So, the declaration judge [inaudible 03:17:53]-
Norman Finkelstein
I said plausibility is the same concept as qualifying.
I said plausibility is the same concept as qualifying.
Steven Bonnell
The court is not asked at this present phase of the proceedings to determine whether South Africa’s allegations of genocide are well-founded. They’re not even well-founded. You said that plausible was a high standard, it’s absolutely not. It’s a misrepresentation of the strength of the case against Israel, just like the majority of the quotes they have in this case are. And also you said it was an extremely well-founded case. They spent like one-fourth of all the quotations, some even pulled from the Goldstone Report, that actually deal with the intent part, which is, by the way, I don’t know if you used the phrase dolus specialis, that the intentional part of genocide-
The court is not asked at this present phase of the proceedings to determine whether South Africa’s allegations of genocide are well-founded. They’re not even well-founded. You said that plausible was a high standard, it’s absolutely not. It’s a misrepresentation of the strength of the case against Israel, just like the majority of the quotes they have in this case are. And also you said it was an extremely well-founded case. They spent like one-fourth of all the quotations, some even pulled from the Goldstone Report, that actually deal with the intent part, which is, by the way, I don’t know if you used the phrase dolus specialis, that the intentional part of genocide-
Mouin Rabbani
I don’t know that term.
I don’t know that term.
Steven Bonnell
I think it’s called dolus specialis, it’s the most important part of genocide, which is proving it is a highly special intent to commit genocide. It’s possible that Israel could-
I think it’s called dolus specialis, it’s the most important part of genocide, which is proving it is a highly special intent to commit genocide. It’s possible that Israel could-
Norman Finkelstein
That’s [foreign language 03:18:43].
That’s [foreign language 03:18:43].
Steven Bonnell
Yes, I understand the state of mind, but for genocide, it’s called dolus specialis. It’s a highly special intent. Did you read the case?
Yes, I understand the state of mind, but for genocide, it’s called dolus specialis. It’s a highly special intent. Did you read the case?
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah.
Yeah.
Steven Bonnell
It is a highly special intent [inaudible 03:18:56]-
It is a highly special intent [inaudible 03:18:56]-
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Berelli, I’m going to ask you again-
Mr. Berelli, I’m going to ask you again-
Steven Bonnell
Yes.
Yes.
Norman Finkelstein
… Please stop displaying your imbecility.
… Please stop displaying your imbecility.
Steven Bonnell
I’m sorry if you think the declaration of the judge is imbecility.
I’m sorry if you think the declaration of the judge is imbecility.
Norman Finkelstein
Don’t put on public display that you are a moron. At least have the self-possession to shut up. Did I read the case?
Don’t put on public display that you are a moron. At least have the self-possession to shut up. Did I read the case?
Steven Bonnell
I’m comfortable putting my display on camera if you’re comfortable putting yours in books.
I’m comfortable putting my display on camera if you’re comfortable putting yours in books.
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Berelli, I read the case around four times. I read all of the majority opinion, the declarations, I read our own Barack’s declaration [inaudible 03:19:27]-
Mr. Berelli, I read the case around four times. I read all of the majority opinion, the declarations, I read our own Barack’s declaration [inaudible 03:19:27]-
Steven Bonnell
Then why are you lying and saying plausible is a high standard?
Then why are you lying and saying plausible is a high standard?
Norman Finkelstein
Because I said even reaching the benchmark of plausibility is a very high standard in the world. It’s the equivalent of a regional player qualifying for an Olympics. It’s still two steps removed, you may not be on the team, and you may not get a medal, but to get qualified, which in this context is the equivalent of plausible, you must be doing something pretty horrible. As it happens, Professor Morris-
Because I said even reaching the benchmark of plausibility is a very high standard in the world. It’s the equivalent of a regional player qualifying for an Olympics. It’s still two steps removed, you may not be on the team, and you may not get a medal, but to get qualified, which in this context is the equivalent of plausible, you must be doing something pretty horrible. As it happens, Professor Morris-
Benny Morris
The court will rule there was no genocide. That’s what the court will rule. Remember what I just told you, the court will rule there was no genocide.
The court will rule there was no genocide. That’s what the court will rule. Remember what I just told you, the court will rule there was no genocide.
Norman Finkelstein
I don’t expect to be even around when the court reaches its final decision.
I don’t expect to be even around when the court reaches its final decision.
Benny Morris
Why?
Why?
Norman Finkelstein
Why? It’ll take a long, long time.
Why? It’ll take a long, long time.
Benny Morris
Two years, three years.
Two years, three years.
Norman Finkelstein
No, I don’t think it’ll take two or three years.
No, I don’t think it’ll take two or three years.
Mouin Rabbani
Bosnia, which was admittedly a special type of case, because they were accusing Serbia of sponsoring the Bosnian Serbs, that took I think 17 years from ’90-
Bosnia, which was admittedly a special type of case, because they were accusing Serbia of sponsoring the Bosnian Serbs, that took I think 17 years from ’90-
Benny Morris
I assume they’ll take two or three years.
I assume they’ll take two or three years.
Lex Fridman
But the point you’re making, so this is a legal-
But the point you’re making, so this is a legal-
Norman Finkelstein
I’m saying that something horrible must be happening to even achieve-
I’m saying that something horrible must be happening to even achieve-
Benny Morris
It is horrible, it’s a war.
It is horrible, it’s a war.
Steven Bonnell
That is true, yes.
That is true, yes.
Benny Morris
It’s horrible.
It’s horrible.
Norman Finkelstein
Except they weren’t rendering a ruling on the war, they were rendering a ruling on the genocide.
Except they weren’t rendering a ruling on the war, they were rendering a ruling on the genocide.
Mouin Rabbani
And I think the suggestion-
And I think the suggestion-
Steven Bonnell
And they said it was plausible, they also said it plausible that Israel is committing a military operation as well.
And they said it was plausible, they also said it plausible that Israel is committing a military operation as well.
Mouin Rabbani
But I think the problem with your characterization is you’re saying in so many words the South Africans basically only have to show up in court with a coherent statement.
But I think the problem with your characterization is you’re saying in so many words the South Africans basically only have to show up in court with a coherent statement.
Benny Morris
Right.
Right.
Steven Bonnell
That is correct.
That is correct.
Benny Morris
In today’s atmosphere, that’s probably correct.
In today’s atmosphere, that’s probably correct.
Mouin Rabbani
They needed to do a lot more. They needed to persuade-
They needed to do a lot more. They needed to persuade-
Norman Finkelstein
The American judge?
The American judge?
Mouin Rabbani
They needed to persuade-
They needed to persuade-
Benny Morris
Judges go according to what the majority want to hear.
Judges go according to what the majority want to hear.
Mouin Rabbani
But they needed-
But they needed-
Norman Finkelstein
She was the president.
She was the president.
Mouin Rabbani
They needed to persuade the court that it was worth investing several years of their time in hearing this case.
They needed to persuade the court that it was worth investing several years of their time in hearing this case.
Benny Morris
They’re probably well-paid for it.
They’re probably well-paid for it.
Mouin Rabbani
They’re well paid whether they take this case or not. They have a full docket whether they accept or reject this case, and I don’t think we should-
They’re well paid whether they take this case or not. They have a full docket whether they accept or reject this case, and I don’t think we should-
Benny Morris
Remember what I just said, they won’t rule there was genocide. Remember what I said.
Remember what I just said, they won’t rule there was genocide. Remember what I said.
Steven Bonnell
Also, I recommend people actually read the case and follow through a lot of the quotes that they just don’t show genocidal intent.
Also, I recommend people actually read the case and follow through a lot of the quotes that they just don’t show genocidal intent.
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Berelli, brace yourself.
Mr. Berelli, brace yourself.
Steven Bonnell
The Israeli minister of finance on the 8th of October, 2023, this is taken from the ICJ, this is from South Africa submission Bezalel Smotrich… I can’t read this.
The Israeli minister of finance on the 8th of October, 2023, this is taken from the ICJ, this is from South Africa submission Bezalel Smotrich… I can’t read this.
Benny Morris
Bezalel Smotrich.
Bezalel Smotrich.
Steven Bonnell
There you go, at a meeting of the Israeli cabinet that, “We need to deal a below that hasn’t been seen in 50 years and take down Gaza.” But again, if you click through and you read the source, their own linked source, it says, as per this own source, “The powerful finance minister, settler leader Bezalel Smotrich, I can’t pronounce this, demanded at the cabinet meeting late Saturday that the army, ‘Hit Hamas brutally and not take the matter of the captives into significant consideration.’ ‘As in war, you have to be brutal.’ He was quoted as saying, ‘We need to deal a blow that hasn’t been seen in 50 years and take down Gaza.'” You can’t strip the quotation of Hamas, an entity we are at war with, and then [inaudible 03:22:38] there was genocidal intent.
There you go, at a meeting of the Israeli cabinet that, “We need to deal a below that hasn’t been seen in 50 years and take down Gaza.” But again, if you click through and you read the source, their own linked source, it says, as per this own source, “The powerful finance minister, settler leader Bezalel Smotrich, I can’t pronounce this, demanded at the cabinet meeting late Saturday that the army, ‘Hit Hamas brutally and not take the matter of the captives into significant consideration.’ ‘As in war, you have to be brutal.’ He was quoted as saying, ‘We need to deal a blow that hasn’t been seen in 50 years and take down Gaza.'” You can’t strip the quotation of Hamas, an entity we are at war with, and then [inaudible 03:22:38] there was genocidal intent.
Norman Finkelstein
[inaudible 03:22:40] Gaza.
[inaudible 03:22:40] Gaza.
Benny Morris
That’s not genocidal intent.
That’s not genocidal intent.
Steven Bonnell
When the Ukrainians say, “We need to defeat Russia-“
When the Ukrainians say, “We need to defeat Russia-“
Norman Finkelstein
[inaudible 03:22:41], that’s not genocidal?
[inaudible 03:22:41], that’s not genocidal?
Steven Bonnell
No, when Ukraine says, “We need to defeat Russia,” is that genocidal? Do they mean killing all Russian citizens?
No, when Ukraine says, “We need to defeat Russia,” is that genocidal? Do they mean killing all Russian citizens?
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris, here’s another one.
Professor Morris, here’s another one.
Benny Morris
It’s ridiculous.
It’s ridiculous.
Norman Finkelstein
Ridiculous?
Ridiculous?
Benny Morris
Yes, ridiculous.
Yes, ridiculous.
Norman Finkelstein
The American judge-
The American judge-
Benny Morris
He also doesn’t determine policy, but that’s neither here nor there.
He also doesn’t determine policy, but that’s neither here nor there.
Norman Finkelstein
The American judge read-
The American judge read-
Benny Morris
You are holding the American judge to-
You are holding the American judge to-
Norman Finkelstein
Well, she was the president [inaudible 03:23:07]-
Well, she was the president [inaudible 03:23:07]-
Steven Bonnell
He’ll appeal to authority when it agrees with him, and we won’t deal with the actual facts of the matter, ever.
He’ll appeal to authority when it agrees with him, and we won’t deal with the actual facts of the matter, ever.
Norman Finkelstein
The American judge read several of the quotes.
The American judge read several of the quotes.
Benny Morris
Look at the American Supreme Court today, they may support Trump. It shows you how worthy American judges are.
Look at the American Supreme Court today, they may support Trump. It shows you how worthy American judges are.
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris, without going too far afield, if you heard a statement by the defense minister, the defense minister said, “We are going to prevent any food, water, fuel, or electricity from entering Gaza-“
Professor Morris, without going too far afield, if you heard a statement by the defense minister, the defense minister said, “We are going to prevent any food, water, fuel, or electricity from entering Gaza-“
Benny Morris
Did Israel do that?
Did Israel do that?
Norman Finkelstein
No, I’m wondering-
No, I’m wondering-
Benny Morris
Well, he said-
Well, he said-
Norman Finkelstein
I’m asking-
I’m asking-
Benny Morris
… Isn’t Israeli government policy.
… Isn’t Israeli government policy.
Norman Finkelstein
But we’re talking about statements now, intent. How would you interpret that?
But we’re talking about statements now, intent. How would you interpret that?
Benny Morris
After 1,200 of your citizens are murdered the way they were, I would expect extreme statements by lots of politicians.
After 1,200 of your citizens are murdered the way they were, I would expect extreme statements by lots of politicians.
Mouin Rabbani
But you don’t accept extreme Palestinians-
But you don’t accept extreme Palestinians-
Benny Morris
But that’s not a crazy [inaudible 03:24:02]-
But that’s not a crazy [inaudible 03:24:02]-
Mouin Rabbani
Wait, but you don’t accept-
Wait, but you don’t accept-
Benny Morris
What he said isn’t Israeli policy.
What he said isn’t Israeli policy.
Mouin Rabbani
But you don’t-
But you don’t-
Benny Morris
… that’s not Israeli policy.
… that’s not Israeli policy.
Mouin Rabbani
But you don’t accept-
But you don’t accept-
Benny Morris
What he said isn’t Israeli policy. They let in water. They let in gas.
What he said isn’t Israeli policy. They let in water. They let in gas.
Norman Finkelstein
Untrue. Untrue. Untrue.
Untrue. Untrue. Untrue.
Mouin Rabbani
But you don’t accept extreme Palestinian statements after they lost their entire country, not just 1200 people.
But you don’t accept extreme Palestinian statements after they lost their entire country, not just 1200 people.
Benny Morris
That’s a good point. No, no, that’s a good point.
That’s a good point. No, no, that’s a good point.
Lex Fridman
And on that, on that brief moment of agreement, let’s just take a quick pause. We need a smoke break. We need a water break, a bathroom break.
And on that, on that brief moment of agreement, let’s just take a quick pause. We need a smoke break. We need a water break, a bathroom break.
Norman Finkelstein
Take down Gaza is not a genocide.
Take down Gaza is not a genocide.
Steven Bonnell
Defeat Russia is a genocide statement.
Defeat Russia is a genocide statement.
Benny Morris
What does take down Gaza?
What does take down Gaza?
Steven Bonnell
When we went to war with Iraq and we wanted to destroy Iraq, that was a genocidal statement.
When we went to war with Iraq and we wanted to destroy Iraq, that was a genocidal statement.
Benny Morris
Take down Gaza.
Take down Gaza.
Steven Bonnell
There’s a reason why genocide is such an importantly guarded concept, and it’s not to condemn every nation that goes to war.
There’s a reason why genocide is such an importantly guarded concept, and it’s not to condemn every nation that goes to war.
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Bonnell-
Mr. Bonnell-
Steven Bonnell
Wait, you do know how to pronounce my name. You’re mispronouncing it intentionally.
Wait, you do know how to pronounce my name. You’re mispronouncing it intentionally.
Benny Morris
He made you an Italian all the time.
He made you an Italian all the time.
Norman Finkelstein
I’m so [inaudible 03:24:46] by your solicitude for international laws.
I’m so [inaudible 03:24:46] by your solicitude for international laws.
Steven Bonnell
You should try learning it sometime. It would help you sort out a lot of the civilian deaths.
You should try learning it sometime. It would help you sort out a lot of the civilian deaths.
Norman Finkelstein
Unfortunately, 15 judges disagree.
Unfortunately, 15 judges disagree.
Steven Bonnell
You could keep citing the judges. You should actually try reading the actual statements.
You could keep citing the judges. You should actually try reading the actual statements.
Benny Morris
This is tiring. You’ve invited us to a tiring session.
This is tiring. You’ve invited us to a tiring session.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. There you go. How are you guys doing?
Yeah. There you go. How are you guys doing?
Benny Morris
Okay. Okay. There are major things to discuss here, not just what some court is doing and the judge in two years time.
Okay. Okay. There are major things to discuss here, not just what some court is doing and the judge in two years time.
Steven Bonnell
Yes. Okay. So what you just said is my whole… One of the reasons why I feel so strongly about this particular conflict is because there are really important things to discuss, but they will never be discussed.
Yes. Okay. So what you just said is my whole… One of the reasons why I feel so strongly about this particular conflict is because there are really important things to discuss, but they will never be discussed.
Benny Morris
They’re not being discussed here.
They’re not being discussed here.
Steven Bonnell
We’re not going to talk about like Area A, B, and C or what a transference of territory. So we’re going to talk about apartheid. We’re not going to talk about the differences in how do you conduct war in an urban environment where people, we’re just going to talk about genocide. We’re not going to talk about what’s a good solution for the Palestinians. We’re just going to say ethnic cleansing,
We’re not going to talk about like Area A, B, and C or what a transference of territory. So we’re going to talk about apartheid. We’re not going to talk about the differences in how do you conduct war in an urban environment where people, we’re just going to talk about genocide. We’re not going to talk about what’s a good solution for the Palestinians. We’re just going to say ethnic cleansing,
Lex Fridman
Is it possible to be productive over the next two hours and talk about solutions?
Is it possible to be productive over the next two hours and talk about solutions?
Benny Morris
About solutions. I have no idea what to say. I mean, I don’t see any solutions on if you wanted a positive end to this discussion, which is what you said at the beginning. I can’t contribute to this because I am pessimistic. I don’t see anywhere any way forward here,
About solutions. I have no idea what to say. I mean, I don’t see any solutions on if you wanted a positive end to this discussion, which is what you said at the beginning. I can’t contribute to this because I am pessimistic. I don’t see anywhere any way forward here,
Steven Bonnell
But the solution is easy. The reason why the solution is hard is because the histories and the myths are completely… There’s a different factual record.
But the solution is easy. The reason why the solution is hard is because the histories and the myths are completely… There’s a different factual record.
Lex Fridman
One of the things would be good to talk about solutions with the future is going back in all the times that it has failed. So every time-
One of the things would be good to talk about solutions with the future is going back in all the times that it has failed. So every time-
Steven Bonnell
But even at that, we’re probably not going to agree. He’s going to say… You could write that. I can predict the whole line. He’s going to say from ’93 to ’99, he’s going to say, Israel didn’t adhere to the Oslo courts ever, settlement expansion continued, raids happened into the West Bank, that there was never a legitimate… That Netanyahu came in and violated the Y Memorandum, the transference. He’s going to say all of this and he’s not going to bring up anything of the Palestinian side. And then for Camp David, he’s going to say that yeah, that Arafat was trying, that the maps and the territorial exchange wasn’t good enough, that they were asking Palestinians to make all the concessions, that Israel would’ve made-
But even at that, we’re probably not going to agree. He’s going to say… You could write that. I can predict the whole line. He’s going to say from ’93 to ’99, he’s going to say, Israel didn’t adhere to the Oslo courts ever, settlement expansion continued, raids happened into the West Bank, that there was never a legitimate… That Netanyahu came in and violated the Y Memorandum, the transference. He’s going to say all of this and he’s not going to bring up anything of the Palestinian side. And then for Camp David, he’s going to say that yeah, that Arafat was trying, that the maps and the territorial exchange wasn’t good enough, that they were asking Palestinians to make all the concessions, that Israel would’ve made-
Lex Fridman
Well, lay it all out. Lay it out.
Well, lay it all out. Lay it out.
Benny Morris
You do talk quickly.
You do talk quickly.
Steven Bonnell
Yeah, I know. Yeah.
Yeah, I know. Yeah.
Benny Morris
Yeah. My future book should interest you guys.
Yeah. My future book should interest you guys.
Mouin Rabbani
What are you working on?
What are you working on?
Benny Morris
No, it’s not working on, it’s actually going to come out. It deals with Israeli and Arab atrocities, war crimes I call them in the ’48 war.
No, it’s not working on, it’s actually going to come out. It deals with Israeli and Arab atrocities, war crimes I call them in the ’48 war.
Mouin Rabbani
Really?
Really?
Benny Morris
That’s the book, just deals with that subject.
That’s the book, just deals with that subject.
Mouin Rabbani
Because I know you’ve also talked about the closure of the archives and stuff.
Because I know you’ve also talked about the closure of the archives and stuff.
Benny Morris
Well, it’s marginal. It deals with that as well. But they have tried to seal off documents, which had already used and seen. Now they don’t let people see them. That’s happened. But it’s marginal in terms of its effect on-
Well, it’s marginal. It deals with that as well. But they have tried to seal off documents, which had already used and seen. Now they don’t let people see them. That’s happened. But it’s marginal in terms of its effect on-
Mouin Rabbani
Were the British archives useful for you, for this new book?
Were the British archives useful for you, for this new book?
Benny Morris
Yeah. Well, for this list it’s mostly Israeli archives. The British and the Americans and the UN did deal with these subjects, but not as well as Israeli documents.
Yeah. Well, for this list it’s mostly Israeli archives. The British and the Americans and the UN did deal with these subjects, but not as well as Israeli documents.
Mouin Rabbani
What’s your casualty count for Deir Yassin?
What’s your casualty count for Deir Yassin?
Benny Morris
It’s about a hundred. I think there’s agreement on that by Israelis and Arabs, 100-105.
It’s about a hundred. I think there’s agreement on that by Israelis and Arabs, 100-105.
Mouin Rabbani
Because before they were-
Because before they were-
Benny Morris
They used to say 245 or 254. Those were the figures. The British and the Arabs and the Haganah agreed on it at the beginning.
They used to say 245 or 254. Those were the figures. The British and the Arabs and the Haganah agreed on it at the beginning.
Mouin Rabbani
Because the Red Cross, I think was the one that first put out that number.
Because the Red Cross, I think was the one that first put out that number.
Benny Morris
I don’t remember. Maybe it was, what’s his name? Jacques de Rainier or maybe, yeah, maybe he came up with that number. But it was just they didn’t count. They didn’t count bodies. They just threw the number out and everybody was happy to blame the Irgun and the Lehi for killing more Arabs than actually-
I don’t remember. Maybe it was, what’s his name? Jacques de Rainier or maybe, yeah, maybe he came up with that number. But it was just they didn’t count. They didn’t count bodies. They just threw the number out and everybody was happy to blame the Irgun and the Lehi for killing more Arabs than actually-
Mouin Rabbani
Well, and they put it to good use as well.
Well, and they put it to good use as well.
Benny Morris
Well, they said that it helped to precipitate more evacuations. So they were happy.
Well, they said that it helped to precipitate more evacuations. So they were happy.
Mouin Rabbani
I think Begin in his memoir [inaudible 03:28:33].
I think Begin in his memoir [inaudible 03:28:33].
Benny Morris
Yeah. Yeah. They also use that number.
Yeah. Yeah. They also use that number.
Peace
Lex Fridman
So first of all, thank you for that heated discussion about the present. I would love to go back into history in a way that informs what we can look for as by way of hope for the future. So when has Israel and Palestine have we been closest to something like a peace settlement, to something that where both sides would be happy and enable the flourishing of both peoples?
So first of all, thank you for that heated discussion about the present. I would love to go back into history in a way that informs what we can look for as by way of hope for the future. So when has Israel and Palestine have we been closest to something like a peace settlement, to something that where both sides would be happy and enable the flourishing of both peoples?
Benny Morris
Well, from my knowledge of the 120 years or so of conflict, the closest I think the two sides have been to reaching some sort of settlement appears to have been in the year 2000 when Barak and then subsequently Clinton offered a two-state settlement to PLO, Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat and Arafat seemed to waver. He didn’t immediately reject what was being offered, but ultimately at the end of Camp David in July 2000, he came down against the proposals. And Clinton who said he wouldn’t blame him, later blamed Arafat for bringing down the summit and not reaching a solution there. But I think there on the table, certainly in the Clinton parameters of December 2000, which followed the proposals by Barak in July, the Palestinians were offered the best deal they’re ever going to get from Israel unless Israel is destroyed and then there’ll just be a Palestinian Arab state.
Well, from my knowledge of the 120 years or so of conflict, the closest I think the two sides have been to reaching some sort of settlement appears to have been in the year 2000 when Barak and then subsequently Clinton offered a two-state settlement to PLO, Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat and Arafat seemed to waver. He didn’t immediately reject what was being offered, but ultimately at the end of Camp David in July 2000, he came down against the proposals. And Clinton who said he wouldn’t blame him, later blamed Arafat for bringing down the summit and not reaching a solution there. But I think there on the table, certainly in the Clinton parameters of December 2000, which followed the proposals by Barak in July, the Palestinians were offered the best deal they’re ever going to get from Israel unless Israel is destroyed and then there’ll just be a Palestinian Arab state.
But the best deal that Israel could ever offer them, they were offered, which essentially was 95% of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, half of the old city of Jerusalem, some sort of joint control of the Temple Mount and the Gaza Strip of course in full. And the Palestinians said no to this deal and nobody really knows why Arafat said no. Some people think he was trying to hold out for slightly better terms, but my reading is that he was constitutionally, psychologically incapable of signing off on a two-state deal, meaning acceptance of the existence of a Jewish state. This was really the problem.
Mouin Rabbani
Of Israel or of a Jewish state?
Of Israel or of a Jewish state?
Benny Morris
Of a Jewish state, the Jewish state of Israel. He wasn’t willing to share Palestine with the Jews and put his name to that. I think he just couldn’t do it. That’s my reading. But some people say it was because the terms were insufficient and he was willing, but was waiting for slightly better terms. I don’t buy that. I don’t think so. But other people disagree with me on this.
Of a Jewish state, the Jewish state of Israel. He wasn’t willing to share Palestine with the Jews and put his name to that. I think he just couldn’t do it. That’s my reading. But some people say it was because the terms were insufficient and he was willing, but was waiting for slightly better terms. I don’t buy that. I don’t think so. But other people disagree with me on this.
Lex Fridman
What do you think?
What do you think?
Mouin Rabbani
Well, just briefly in response, Arafat formally recognized Israel in 1993. Yeah, earlier. I don’t think actually that in 2000-2001, a genuine resolution was on offer because I think the maximum Israel was prepared to offer, admittedly more than it had been prepared to offer in the past, fell short of the minimum that the Palestinians consider to be a reasonable two state settlement. Bearing in mind that as of 1949, Israel controlled 78% of the British mandate of Palestine. Palestinians were seeking a state on the remaining 22%, and this was apparently too much for Israel. My response to your question would be-
Well, just briefly in response, Arafat formally recognized Israel in 1993. Yeah, earlier. I don’t think actually that in 2000-2001, a genuine resolution was on offer because I think the maximum Israel was prepared to offer, admittedly more than it had been prepared to offer in the past, fell short of the minimum that the Palestinians consider to be a reasonable two state settlement. Bearing in mind that as of 1949, Israel controlled 78% of the British mandate of Palestine. Palestinians were seeking a state on the remaining 22%, and this was apparently too much for Israel. My response to your question would be-
Benny Morris
Wait, wait. They were being offered something like 22 or 21%.
Wait, wait. They were being offered something like 22 or 21%.
Mouin Rabbani
They were being offered, I think less than a withdrawal to the 1967 borders with mutual and minor and reciprocal land swaps and the just resolution of-
They were being offered, I think less than a withdrawal to the 1967 borders with mutual and minor and reciprocal land swaps and the just resolution of-
Benny Morris
The refugee problem was one of the problems.
The refugee problem was one of the problems.
Mouin Rabbani
Refugee question. Yes. I worked for a number of years with an international crisis group and my boss at the time was Rob Malley, who was one of the American officials, present at Camp David.
Refugee question. Yes. I worked for a number of years with an international crisis group and my boss at the time was Rob Malley, who was one of the American officials, present at Camp David.
Benny Morris
Who was be thrown out of the State Department or whatever.
Who was be thrown out of the State Department or whatever.
Mouin Rabbani
The point I want to make about Rob was he wrote, I think, a very perceptive article in 2001 in the New York Review of books. I know that you and Ehud Barak have had a debate with them, but I think he gives a very compelling reason of why and how Camp David failed. But rather than going into that, I’ll-
The point I want to make about Rob was he wrote, I think, a very perceptive article in 2001 in the New York Review of books. I know that you and Ehud Barak have had a debate with them, but I think he gives a very compelling reason of why and how Camp David failed. But rather than going into that, I’ll-
Benny Morris
He wrote that together with Hussein Araj.
He wrote that together with Hussein Araj.
Mouin Rabbani
Hussein Araj, yes, who was not at Camp David. But in response to your question, I think there could have been a real possibility of Israeli-Palestinian and Arab-Israeli peace in the mid 1970s in the wake of the 1973 October War. I’ll recall that in 1971, Moshe Dayan, Israel’s defense minister at the time, full of triumphalism about Israel’s victory in 1967 speaking to a group of Israeli military veterans, stated, “If I had to choose between Sharm El-Sheikh without peace or peace without Sharm El-Sheikh…” This is referring to the resort in Egyptian Sinai, which was an under Israeli occupation. Dayan said, “I will choose for Sharm El-Sheikh without peace.” Then the 1973 war came along and I think Israeli calculations began to change very significantly.
Hussein Araj, yes, who was not at Camp David. But in response to your question, I think there could have been a real possibility of Israeli-Palestinian and Arab-Israeli peace in the mid 1970s in the wake of the 1973 October War. I’ll recall that in 1971, Moshe Dayan, Israel’s defense minister at the time, full of triumphalism about Israel’s victory in 1967 speaking to a group of Israeli military veterans, stated, “If I had to choose between Sharm El-Sheikh without peace or peace without Sharm El-Sheikh…” This is referring to the resort in Egyptian Sinai, which was an under Israeli occupation. Dayan said, “I will choose for Sharm El-Sheikh without peace.” Then the 1973 war came along and I think Israeli calculations began to change very significantly.
And I think it was in that context that had there been a joint US-Soviet push for an Arab-Israeli and Israeli-Palestinian resolution that incorporated both an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 lines and the establishment of a Palestinian state in the occupied territories, I think there was a very reasonable prospect for that being achieved. It ended up being aborted, I think for several reasons, and ultimately the Egyptian President Anwar Sadat decided for reasons we can discuss later to launch a separate unilateral initiative for Israeli Egyptian rather than Arab-Israeli peace. And I think once that set in motion, the prospects disappeared because Israel essentially saw its most powerful adversary removed from the equation and felt that this would give it a free hand in the occupied territories also in Lebanon to get rid of the PLO and so on.
You ask when were we closest, and I can’t give you an answer of when we were closest. I can only tell you when I think we could have been close and that was a lost opportunity. If we look at the situation today, there’s been a lot of discussion about a two-state settlement. My own view, and I’ve written about this, I don’t buy the arguments of the naysayers that we have passed the so-called point of no return with respect to a two-state settlement. Certainly if you look at the Israeli position in the occupied territories, I would argue it’s more tenuous than was the French position in Algeria in 1954, than was a British position in Ireland in 1916, than was a Ethiopian position in Eritrea in 1990. And so as a matter of practicality, as a matter of principle, I do think the establishment of a Palestinian state in the occupied territories remains realistic.
I think the question that we now need to ask ourselves, it’s one I’m certainly asking myself since October 7th and looking at Israel’s genocidal campaign, but also looking at larger questions, is it desirable? Can you have peace with what increasingly appears to be an irrational genocidal state that seeks to confront and resolve each and every political challenge with violence? And that reacts to its failure to achieve solutions to political challenges with violence by applying even more violence, that has an insatiable lust for Palestinian territory, that a genocidal apartheid state that seems increasingly incapable of even conceiving of peaceful coexistence with the other people on that land. So I’m very pessimistic that a solution is possible.
I grew up in Western Europe in the long shadow of the Second World War. I think we can all agree that there could have been no peace in Europe had certain regimes on that continent not been removed from power. I look at Southeast Asia in the late 1970s, and I think we all agreed that there could not have been peace that region had the Khmer Rouge not been ousted. I look at Southern Africa during the 1990s and I think we can all be agreed that had the white minority regimes that ruled Zimbabwe and South Africa not been dismantled, there could not have been peace in that region. And although I think it’s worth having a discussion, I do think it’s now legitimate question to ask, can there be peace without dismantling the Zionist regime?
And I make a very clear distinction between the Israeli state and its institutions on the one hand and the Israeli people who I think regardless of our discussion about the history, I think you can now talk about an Israeli people and the people that have developed rights over time and a formula for peaceful coexistence with them will need to be found, which is a separate matter from dismantling the Israeli state and its institutions. And again, I haven’t reached clear conclusions about this except to say as a practical matter, I think a two state settlement remains feasible. But I think there are very legitimate questions about its desirability and about whether peace can be achieved in the Middle East with the persistence of an irrational genocidal apartheid regime. Particularly because Israeli society is beginning to develop many extremely, extremely distasteful supremacist, dehumanizing aspects that I think also stand in the way of coexistence that are being fed by this regime.
Lex Fridman
So if you look back into history when we’re closest to peace, and do you draw any hope from any of them?
So if you look back into history when we’re closest to peace, and do you draw any hope from any of them?
Steven Bonnell
I feel like in 2000, I feel like the deal that was present, at least at the end of the Taba Summit, I think in terms of what Israel, I think had the appetite to give and what the Palestinians would’ve gotten, would’ve definitely been the most agreeable between the two parties. I don’t know if in ’73. I’m not sure if the appetite would’ve ever been there for the Arab states to negotiate alongside the Palestinians. I know that in Jordan there was no love for the Palestinians after 1970, after Black September. I know that Sadat had no love for the Palestinians due to their association with the Muslim brotherhoods, attempted assassinations in Egypt.
I feel like in 2000, I feel like the deal that was present, at least at the end of the Taba Summit, I think in terms of what Israel, I think had the appetite to give and what the Palestinians would’ve gotten, would’ve definitely been the most agreeable between the two parties. I don’t know if in ’73. I’m not sure if the appetite would’ve ever been there for the Arab states to negotiate alongside the Palestinians. I know that in Jordan there was no love for the Palestinians after 1970, after Black September. I know that Sadat had no love for the Palestinians due to their association with the Muslim brotherhoods, attempted assassinations in Egypt.
Mouin Rabbani
Sorry, which? PLO and the Muslim brotherhood?
Sorry, which? PLO and the Muslim brotherhood?
Steven Bonnell
Sadat was upset because there were attempted assassinations by people in… Oh no, an assassination. It was a personal friend of his, Yusuf Al-Sabah. I can’t pronounce that. He was assassinated by a Palestinian-
Sadat was upset because there were attempted assassinations by people in… Oh no, an assassination. It was a personal friend of his, Yusuf Al-Sabah. I can’t pronounce that. He was assassinated by a Palestinian-
Mouin Rabbani
He was killed by the Abu Nidal organization, which was not part of the PLO and had nothing to do with the Muslim Brotherhood.
He was killed by the Abu Nidal organization, which was not part of the PLO and had nothing to do with the Muslim Brotherhood.
Steven Bonnell
Admittedly, he says as much, belongs to a [inaudible 03:42:05] group, not PLO directly. But I think that there was a history of the Palestinians sometimes fighting with their neighboring states that were hosting them if they weren’t getting the political concessions they wanted. The assassination of the Jordanian king in ’51 might be another example of that in Jordan. It feels like over a long period of time, it feels like the Palestinians have been told from the neighboring Arab states that if they just continue to enact violence, whether in Israel or abroad, that eventually a state will materialize somehow. I don’t think it’s gotten them any closer to a state. If anything, I think it’s taken them farther and farther and farther away from one, and I think as long as the hyperbolic language is continually employed internationally, the idea that Israel is committing a genocide, the idea that there is an apartheid, the idea that they live in a concentration camp, all of these words, I think further the narrative for the Palestinians that Israel is an evil state that needs to be dismantled.
Admittedly, he says as much, belongs to a [inaudible 03:42:05] group, not PLO directly. But I think that there was a history of the Palestinians sometimes fighting with their neighboring states that were hosting them if they weren’t getting the political concessions they wanted. The assassination of the Jordanian king in ’51 might be another example of that in Jordan. It feels like over a long period of time, it feels like the Palestinians have been told from the neighboring Arab states that if they just continue to enact violence, whether in Israel or abroad, that eventually a state will materialize somehow. I don’t think it’s gotten them any closer to a state. If anything, I think it’s taken them farther and farther and farther away from one, and I think as long as the hyperbolic language is continually employed internationally, the idea that Israel is committing a genocide, the idea that there is an apartheid, the idea that they live in a concentration camp, all of these words, I think further the narrative for the Palestinians that Israel is an evil state that needs to be dismantled.
I mean you said as much about the institution, at least to the Zionist government. Israel’s government is probably not going anywhere. All of the other surrounding Arab states have accepted that, or at least most of them down in the Gulf. Egypt and Jordan have accepted that the Palestinians need to accept it too. The Israeli state or the state apparatus is not going anywhere, and at some point they need to realize like, “Hey, we need a leader that’s going to come out and represent us, represent all of us, is willing to take political risks, is willing to negotiate some lasting piece for us, and it’s not going to be the international community or some invocation of international law or some invocation of morality or justice that’s going to extricate us from this conflict. It’s going to take some actual difficult political maneuvering on the ground-“
Mouin Rabbani
Of accepting Israel?
Of accepting Israel?
Steven Bonnell
Of accepting Israel.
Of accepting Israel.
Mouin Rabbani
Which they formally did in 1993.
Which they formally did in 1993.
Steven Bonnell
Which they formally did in 1993. But then no lasting piece came after that in 2000.
Which they formally did in 1993. But then no lasting piece came after that in 2000.
Mouin Rabbani
No. Because 1993 was not a peace agreement.
No. Because 1993 was not a peace agreement.
Steven Bonnell
Sure. The Oslo Accords didn’t have a final solution.
Sure. The Oslo Accords didn’t have a final solution.
Mouin Rabbani
… were an interim agreement. And Palestinians actually began clamoring for commencing the permanent status resolutions on schedule, and the Israelis kept delaying them. In fact, they only began, I believe in ’99 under American pressure on the Israelis.
… were an interim agreement. And Palestinians actually began clamoring for commencing the permanent status resolutions on schedule, and the Israelis kept delaying them. In fact, they only began, I believe in ’99 under American pressure on the Israelis.
Benny Morris
I think you’re being a bit one-sided. Both sides didn’t fulfill the promise of Oslo and the steps needed for Oslo. There was Palestinian terrorism which accompanied Israel’s expansion of settlements and other things. The two things fed each other and led to what happened in 2000, which was a breakdown of the talks altogether when the Palestinians said no. But I don’t agree incidentally with this definition of Israel or the Israeli state as apartheid. It’s not. There is some sort of apartheid going on in the West Bank. The Israeli regime itself is not an apartheid regime. That is nonsense, by any definition of apartheid, which-
I think you’re being a bit one-sided. Both sides didn’t fulfill the promise of Oslo and the steps needed for Oslo. There was Palestinian terrorism which accompanied Israel’s expansion of settlements and other things. The two things fed each other and led to what happened in 2000, which was a breakdown of the talks altogether when the Palestinians said no. But I don’t agree incidentally with this definition of Israel or the Israeli state as apartheid. It’s not. There is some sort of apartheid going on in the West Bank. The Israeli regime itself is not an apartheid regime. That is nonsense, by any definition of apartheid, which-
Mouin Rabbani
Well, by the formal definition, I think it qualifies.
Well, by the formal definition, I think it qualifies.
Benny Morris
No, it doesn’t qualify. Apartheid is a race-based distinction between different segments of the population and some of them don’t have any representation at all, like the Blacks in South Africa.
No, it doesn’t qualify. Apartheid is a race-based distinction between different segments of the population and some of them don’t have any representation at all, like the Blacks in South Africa.
Mouin Rabbani
That’s not a requirement.
That’s not a requirement.
Benny Morris
In Israel itself, the minority, the Arabs do have representation, do have rights, and so on. I don’t think Israel is also genocidal. I don’t think it’s being genocidal. It wasn’t so in ’48. It wasn’t so in ’67, and it hasn’t been recently in my view. And talk about dismantling Israel and that’s what you’re talking about is, and I think Steven said it correctly, is counterproductive. It just pushes Israelis further away from willing to give Palestinians anything.
In Israel itself, the minority, the Arabs do have representation, do have rights, and so on. I don’t think Israel is also genocidal. I don’t think it’s being genocidal. It wasn’t so in ’48. It wasn’t so in ’67, and it hasn’t been recently in my view. And talk about dismantling Israel and that’s what you’re talking about is, and I think Steven said it correctly, is counterproductive. It just pushes Israelis further away from willing to give Palestinians anything.
Lex Fridman
Please, Norm tell me you have-
Please, Norm tell me you have-
Benny Morris
Something optimistic to say.
Something optimistic to say.
Lex Fridman
… optimistic to say.
… optimistic to say.
Norman Finkelstein
Even though I agree, I’ve thought about it a lot and I agree with Marine’s analysis. I’m not really in the business of punditry. I’d rather look at the historical record where I feel more comfortable and I feel on terra firma. So I’d like to just go through that. I don’t quite, I agree and I disagree with Mouin on the ’73 issue. After the 1973 war, it was clear that Israel was surprised by what happened during the war, and it took a big hit. The estimates are… I don’t know what numbers you used, but I hear between two and 3000 Israeli soldiers were killed during the 19-
Even though I agree, I’ve thought about it a lot and I agree with Marine’s analysis. I’m not really in the business of punditry. I’d rather look at the historical record where I feel more comfortable and I feel on terra firma. So I’d like to just go through that. I don’t quite, I agree and I disagree with Mouin on the ’73 issue. After the 1973 war, it was clear that Israel was surprised by what happened during the war, and it took a big hit. The estimates are… I don’t know what numbers you used, but I hear between two and 3000 Israeli soldiers were killed during the 19-
Mouin Rabbani
It was 2,500.
It was 2,500.
Benny Morris
Yeah, 27. Yeah.
Yeah, 27. Yeah.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, so I got it right. I read different numbers. That’s a very large number of Israelis who were killed. There were moments at the beginning of the war where there was a fear that this might be it.
Okay, so I got it right. I read different numbers. That’s a very large number of Israelis who were killed. There were moments at the beginning of the war where there was a fear that this might be it.
Benny Morris
There wasn’t.
There wasn’t.
Norman Finkelstein
No. The Israelis fear-
No. The Israelis fear-
Benny Morris
This is nonsense. Everybody forgets Israel’s atomic weaponry.
This is nonsense. Everybody forgets Israel’s atomic weaponry.
Norman Finkelstein
I know, but-
I know, but-
Benny Morris
So how could they have been defeated?
So how could they have been defeated?
Norman Finkelstein
Because Dayan expressed-
Because Dayan expressed-
Mouin Rabbani
Didn’t Dayan talk about the collapse of the third temple?
Didn’t Dayan talk about the collapse of the third temple?
Benny Morris
He did, but it was hysterical and silly because Israel had weapons. They wanted to stop the Syrians or the Egyptians.
He did, but it was hysterical and silly because Israel had weapons. They wanted to stop the Syrians or the Egyptians.
Mouin Rabbani
But we’re talking about perceptions.
But we’re talking about perceptions.
Norman Finkelstein
I can’t tell you if he was hysterical or not.
I can’t tell you if he was hysterical or not.
Benny Morris
No. He was. For a day, he was hysterical.
No. He was. For a day, he was hysterical.
Norman Finkelstein
I wasn’t in the same room with him.
I wasn’t in the same room with him.
Benny Morris
For a day, he was hysterical.
For a day, he was hysterical.
Norman Finkelstein
But I’m just saying, let’s not bog down on that. The war is over and when President Carter comes into power… Carter was an extremely smart guy. Jimmy Carter, extremely smart guy, and he was very fixed on details. He was probably the most impressive of modern American presidents, in my opinion, by a wide margin. And he was determined to resolve the conflict on a big scale, on the Arab-Israeli scale. On the Palestinian issue, he wouldn’t go past what he called a Palestinian homeland. He wouldn’t accept-
But I’m just saying, let’s not bog down on that. The war is over and when President Carter comes into power… Carter was an extremely smart guy. Jimmy Carter, extremely smart guy, and he was very fixed on details. He was probably the most impressive of modern American presidents, in my opinion, by a wide margin. And he was determined to resolve the conflict on a big scale, on the Arab-Israeli scale. On the Palestinian issue, he wouldn’t go past what he called a Palestinian homeland. He wouldn’t accept-
Mouin Rabbani
Palestinian national home.
Palestinian national home.
Norman Finkelstein
On the Palestinian national home. He wouldn’t go as far as a Palestinian state. I’m not going to go into the details of that. I don’t think realistically, given the political balance of forces that was going to happen, but that’s a separate issue. Let’s get to the issue at hand, namely, what is the obstacle or what has been the obstacle since the early 1970s? Since roughly 1974, the Palestinians have accepted the two states settlement and the June 1967 border. Now as more pressure was exerted on Israel because the Palestinians seemed reasonable, the Israelis, to quote the Israeli political scientist, Avner Yaniv, he since passed from the scene. He said… Yaniv in his book, Dilemmas of Security, he said that the big Israeli fear was what he called the Palestinian peace offensive.
On the Palestinian national home. He wouldn’t go as far as a Palestinian state. I’m not going to go into the details of that. I don’t think realistically, given the political balance of forces that was going to happen, but that’s a separate issue. Let’s get to the issue at hand, namely, what is the obstacle or what has been the obstacle since the early 1970s? Since roughly 1974, the Palestinians have accepted the two states settlement and the June 1967 border. Now as more pressure was exerted on Israel because the Palestinians seemed reasonable, the Israelis, to quote the Israeli political scientist, Avner Yaniv, he since passed from the scene. He said… Yaniv in his book, Dilemmas of Security, he said that the big Israeli fear was what he called the Palestinian peace offensive.
That was their worry that the Palestinians were becoming too moderate. And unless you understand that, you can’t understand the June 1982 Lebanon war. The purpose of the June 1982 Lebanon war was to liquidate the PLO in Southern Lebanon because they were too moderate the Palestinian peace offensive. I’m going to have to fast-forward. There are many events. There was the First Intifada, then there’s the Oslo Accord, and let’s now go to the heart of the issue, namely the 2000-2001 negotiations. Well, the negotiations are divided into three parts for the sake of listeners. There’s Camp David in July 2000, there are the Clinton parameters in December 2000, and then there are negotiations in Taba in Egypt in 2001. Those are the three phases. Now, I have studied the record probably to the point of insanity because there are so many details you have to master.
Benny Morris
I’ll vouch for that, the insanity part, yeah.
I’ll vouch for that, the insanity part, yeah.
Norman Finkelstein
Actually, I will vouch for it. I will personally vouch for it. There is one extensive record from that whole period, from 2000 to you could say 2007, and that is what came to be called the Palestine Papers, which were about 15,000 pages of all the records of the negotiations. I have read through all of them, every single page, and this is what I find. If you look at Shlomo Ben-Ami’s book, which I have with me, Prophets Without Honor, it’s his last book. He says, “Going into Camp David…” That means July, going into Camp David, July 2000, he said the Israelis were willing to return about… Not return. But will withdraw from-
Actually, I will vouch for it. I will personally vouch for it. There is one extensive record from that whole period, from 2000 to you could say 2007, and that is what came to be called the Palestine Papers, which were about 15,000 pages of all the records of the negotiations. I have read through all of them, every single page, and this is what I find. If you look at Shlomo Ben-Ami’s book, which I have with me, Prophets Without Honor, it’s his last book. He says, “Going into Camp David…” That means July, going into Camp David, July 2000, he said the Israelis were willing to return about… Not return. But will withdraw from-
Mouin Rabbani
Relinquish.
Relinquish.
Norman Finkelstein
Relinquish. 92% of the West Bank.
Relinquish. 92% of the West Bank.
Mouin Rabbani
Ben-Ami was at Camp David.
Ben-Ami was at Camp David.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah. Then he was at Taba. Oh, yeah. He was also at Camp David. Israel wanted to keep all the major settlement blocks. It wanted to keep roughly 8% of the West Bank. They were allowing for… You put it at 84 to 90% in your books. They put it at roughly 92%. Israel was willing to give up.
Yeah. Then he was at Taba. Oh, yeah. He was also at Camp David. Israel wanted to keep all the major settlement blocks. It wanted to keep roughly 8% of the West Bank. They were allowing for… You put it at 84 to 90% in your books. They put it at roughly 92%. Israel was willing to give up.
Mouin Rabbani
It also depends how you calculate.
It also depends how you calculate.
Benny Morris
It depends what stage at Camp David because there were two weeks.
It depends what stage at Camp David because there were two weeks.
Norman Finkelstein
I’ll get to that.
I’ll get to that.
Benny Morris
The proposals changed during those two weeks.
The proposals changed during those two weeks.
Norman Finkelstein
So Israel wants to keep all the major settlement blocks.
So Israel wants to keep all the major settlement blocks.
Benny Morris
Means the border area of the West Bank.
Means the border area of the West Bank.
Norman Finkelstein
Well, not the border. We have Ari’el, we have Ma’ale Adumim. We have, as Condoleezza Rice called Ari’el, she said it was a dagger into the heart of the West Bank. So they want to keep 8% of the land. They want to keep the settlement blocks. They want to keep 80% of the settlers. They will not budge an inch on the question of refugees. To quote Ehud Barak in the article he co-authored with you in the New York review of books, “We will accept…” And I think the quote’s accurate. “No moral, legal or historical responsibility for what happened to the refugees.” So forget about even allowing refugees to return. We accept no moral, legal or historical responsibility for the refugees. And on Jerusalem, they wanted to keep large parts of Jerusalem. Now, how do we judge who is reasonable and who is not?
Well, not the border. We have Ari’el, we have Ma’ale Adumim. We have, as Condoleezza Rice called Ari’el, she said it was a dagger into the heart of the West Bank. So they want to keep 8% of the land. They want to keep the settlement blocks. They want to keep 80% of the settlers. They will not budge an inch on the question of refugees. To quote Ehud Barak in the article he co-authored with you in the New York review of books, “We will accept…” And I think the quote’s accurate. “No moral, legal or historical responsibility for what happened to the refugees.” So forget about even allowing refugees to return. We accept no moral, legal or historical responsibility for the refugees. And on Jerusalem, they wanted to keep large parts of Jerusalem. Now, how do we judge who is reasonable and who is not?
Ben-Ami says, “I think the Israeli offer was reasonable.” That’s how he sees it. But what is the standard of reasonable? My standard is what does international law say? International law says the settlements are illegal. Israel wants to keep all the settlement blocks. 15 judges, all 15 in the wall decision in July 2004, all 15 judges, including the American judge, Buergenthal ruled the settlements are illegal under international law. They want to keep 80% of the settlers under international law. All the settlers are illegal in the West Bank. They want to keep large parts of East Jerusalem. But under international law, East Jerusalem is occupied Palestinian territory. That’s what the international-
Benny Morris
Well, not Palestinian, because there was no Palestine.
Well, not Palestinian, because there was no Palestine.
Norman Finkelstein
Excuse me. Okay.
Excuse me. Okay.
Benny Morris
There’s never been a Palestinian state. How could it be Palestinian?
There’s never been a Palestinian state. How could it be Palestinian?
Norman Finkelstein
I listened patiently to you.
I listened patiently to you.
Benny Morris
Sorry.
Sorry.
Norman Finkelstein
Under international law, if you read the decision, all territory, the 2004 wall decision, all territory beyond the green line, which includes East Jerusalem is occupied Palestinian territory.
Under international law, if you read the decision, all territory, the 2004 wall decision, all territory beyond the green line, which includes East Jerusalem is occupied Palestinian territory.
Mouin Rabbani
With the exception of the Golan Heights.
With the exception of the Golan Heights.
Norman Finkelstein
According to the International Court of Justice, the designated unit for Palestinian self-determination, and they deny any right whatsoever on the right of return. I don’t want to go into the details now. The maximum formal offer was by Ehud Omar in 2008. He offered 5,000 refugees could return under what was called family reunification, 5,000, in the course of five years, and no recognition of any Israeli responsibility.
According to the International Court of Justice, the designated unit for Palestinian self-determination, and they deny any right whatsoever on the right of return. I don’t want to go into the details now. The maximum formal offer was by Ehud Omar in 2008. He offered 5,000 refugees could return under what was called family reunification, 5,000, in the course of five years, and no recognition of any Israeli responsibility.
So if you use as the baseline what the UN General Assembly has said and what the International Court of Justice has said, if you use that baseline, international law, by that baseline, all the concessions came from the Palestinian side. Every single concession came from the Palestinian side. None came from the Israeli side. They may have accepted less than what they wanted, but it was still beyond what international law allocated to them. Now you say-
Mouin Rabbani
Allocated to the Palestinians.
Allocated to the Palestinians.
Norman Finkelstein
Allocated to Palestinians, yes. Thank you for the clarification. Now about Arafat, like the Mufti, never liked the guy. I think that was one of the only disagreements Mouin and I had. When Arafat passed, you were a little sentimental. I was not. I never liked the guy. But politics, you don’t have to like the guy. There was no question. Nobody argues it that whenever the negotiation started up, the Palestinians just kept saying the same things.
Allocated to Palestinians, yes. Thank you for the clarification. Now about Arafat, like the Mufti, never liked the guy. I think that was one of the only disagreements Mouin and I had. When Arafat passed, you were a little sentimental. I was not. I never liked the guy. But politics, you don’t have to like the guy. There was no question. Nobody argues it that whenever the negotiation started up, the Palestinians just kept saying the same things.
Benny Morris
No.
No.
Norman Finkelstein
No.
No.
Benny Morris
They kept saying no.
They kept saying no.
Norman Finkelstein
No. Professor Morris, with due respect, incorrect. They kept saying, “International legitimacy, international law, UN resolutions.” They said, “We already gave you what the law required. We gave that in 1988, November 1988, and then ratified again at Oslo in 1993.” And they said, “Now we want what was promised us under international law.” And that was the one point where everybody on the other side agreed. Clinton, don’t talk to me about international law. Livni during the Olmert administration. She said, “I studied international law. I don’t believe in international law.” Every single member on the other side, they didn’t want to hear from international law. And to my thinking that that is the only reasonable baseline for trying to resolve the conflict. And Israel has, along with the US-
No. Professor Morris, with due respect, incorrect. They kept saying, “International legitimacy, international law, UN resolutions.” They said, “We already gave you what the law required. We gave that in 1988, November 1988, and then ratified again at Oslo in 1993.” And they said, “Now we want what was promised us under international law.” And that was the one point where everybody on the other side agreed. Clinton, don’t talk to me about international law. Livni during the Olmert administration. She said, “I studied international law. I don’t believe in international law.” Every single member on the other side, they didn’t want to hear from international law. And to my thinking that that is the only reasonable baseline for trying to resolve the conflict. And Israel has, along with the US-
Benny Morris
When has international law been relevant to any conflict basically in the world?
When has international law been relevant to any conflict basically in the world?
Norman Finkelstein
That’s why-
That’s why-
Benny Morris
Over the last 150 years.
Over the last 150 years.
Norman Finkelstein
That’s why the Palestinians have to recognize Israel because that’s international law.
That’s why the Palestinians have to recognize Israel because that’s international law.
Benny Morris
But international law is-
But international law is-
Norman Finkelstein
[inaudible 03:58:00] have to recognize Israel because that’s international law.
[inaudible 03:58:00] have to recognize Israel because that’s international law.
Benny Morris
No, but international law is meaningless.
No, but international law is meaningless.
Norman Finkelstein
That was UN Resolution 242.
That was UN Resolution 242.
Benny Morris
Conflicts are not solved by international law or in accordance with international law.
Conflicts are not solved by international law or in accordance with international law.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah. But then, Professor Morris, for argument’s sake, let’s agree on that, strictly for argument’s sake. What’s the alternative? Dennis Ross said, “We’re going to decide who gets what on the basis of needs.” So he says, “Israel needs this. Israel needs that. Israel needs that.”
Yeah. But then, Professor Morris, for argument’s sake, let’s agree on that, strictly for argument’s sake. What’s the alternative? Dennis Ross said, “We’re going to decide who gets what on the basis of needs.” So he says, “Israel needs this. Israel needs that. Israel needs that.”
Dennis Ross decided to be the philosopher king. He’s going to decide on the basis of needs. Well, if you asked me, since Gaza is one of the densest places on Earth, it needs [inaudible 03:58:50]-
Mouin Rabbani
Tel Aviv.
Tel Aviv.
Norman Finkelstein
Yes. It needs-
Yes. It needs-
Benny Morris
It needs part of Sinai. That’s what Gaza-
It needs part of Sinai. That’s what Gaza-
Norman Finkelstein
It needs a nice big chunk-
It needs a nice big chunk-
Benny Morris
Of Sinai.
Of Sinai.
Norman Finkelstein
Not Sinai.
Not Sinai.
Benny Morris
That’s what it actually needs.
That’s what it actually needs.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. I don’t even want to go there. It needs a nice big chunk, but I have to accept international law says no. Okay.
Okay. I don’t even want to go there. It needs a nice big chunk, but I have to accept international law says no. Okay.
Benny Morris
International law is irrelevant.
International law is irrelevant.
Norman Finkelstein
Now, Benjamin says, “I think the Israeli offer was reasonable.” Okay.
Now, Benjamin says, “I think the Israeli offer was reasonable.” Okay.
Benny Morris
And he’s a reasonable guy. You know that.
And he’s a reasonable guy. You know that.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, I don’t want to go there. I’ve debated him and partly agree with you. But who decides what’s reasonable? I think the international community in its political incarnation, the General Assembly, the Security Council, all those UN Security Council resolutions saying the settlements are illegal, annexation of East Jerusalem is null and void, and the International Court of Justice, that, to me, is a reasonable standard. And by that standard, the Palestinians were asked to make concessions, which I consider unreasonable or the international community considers unreasonable.
Okay, I don’t want to go there. I’ve debated him and partly agree with you. But who decides what’s reasonable? I think the international community in its political incarnation, the General Assembly, the Security Council, all those UN Security Council resolutions saying the settlements are illegal, annexation of East Jerusalem is null and void, and the International Court of Justice, that, to me, is a reasonable standard. And by that standard, the Palestinians were asked to make concessions, which I consider unreasonable or the international community considers unreasonable.
Steven Bonnell
I think that the issue is when you apply international law or international standards, I wouldn’t say what Benny Morris says, that they’re irrelevant, but I think that these have to be seen as informing the conversation. I don’t think these are the final shape of the conversation. I don’t think, historically, Israel has ever negotiated within the strict bounds of whether we’re talking Resolution 242, whether we’re talking about any General Assembly resolutions. That’s just not how these negotiations tend to go.
I think that the issue is when you apply international law or international standards, I wouldn’t say what Benny Morris says, that they’re irrelevant, but I think that these have to be seen as informing the conversation. I don’t think these are the final shape of the conversation. I don’t think, historically, Israel has ever negotiated within the strict bounds of whether we’re talking Resolution 242, whether we’re talking about any General Assembly resolutions. That’s just not how these negotiations tend to go.
You might consider international opinion on things, but at the end of the day, it’s the bilateral negotiations, oftentimes historically started in secret, independent of the international community, that end up shaping what the final agreements look like. I think the issue with this broad appeal to international law is, again, going back to my earlier point about all of the euphemistic words, all it simply does is drive Palestinian expectations up to a level that is never going to be satisfied. For instance, you can throw that ICJ opinion all you want, it was an advisory opinion, that came in 2004, how Palestinians gained more or less land since that 2004 advisory opinion was issued.
Mouin Rabbani
So what would your standard be then?
So what would your standard be then?
Steven Bonnell
Both sides have to have a delegation that confronts each other and they assess the realistic conditions on the ground, and they try to figure out, within the confines of international law-
Both sides have to have a delegation that confronts each other and they assess the realistic conditions on the ground, and they try to figure out, within the confines of international law-
Mouin Rabbani
See, the problem with that-
See, the problem with that-
Steven Bonnell
… [inaudible 04:01:13] both sides are reasonable for. But for instance, this statement of retreat from the West Bank. What is it? 400,000 settlers? How many settlers live in the West Bank now?
… [inaudible 04:01:13] both sides are reasonable for. But for instance, this statement of retreat from the West Bank. What is it? 400,000 settlers? How many settlers live in the West Bank now?
Benny Morris
Probably half a million.
Probably half a million.
Steven Bonnell
Yeah.
Yeah.
Benny Morris
Depends if you include the Jerusalem suburbs or not.
Depends if you include the Jerusalem suburbs or not.
Steven Bonnell
Yeah. 4 or 500,000 people.
Yeah. 4 or 500,000 people.
Norman Finkelstein
I think it’s 700,000.
I think it’s 700,000.
Benny Morris
With the Jerusalem suburbs, perhaps.
With the Jerusalem suburbs, perhaps.
Steven Bonnell
Yeah. Half a million people are-
Yeah. Half a million people are-
Benny Morris
But Israel calls that Jerusalem, not settlements.
But Israel calls that Jerusalem, not settlements.
Norman Finkelstein
I know that, but that’s not what the law… The law calls it null and void.
I know that, but that’s not what the law… The law calls it null and void.
Benny Morris
[inaudible 04:01:34]. The law is irrelevant.
[inaudible 04:01:34]. The law is irrelevant.
Steven Bonnell
We can say whatever we want until we’re blue in the face, but half a million Israeli people are not being expelled from [inaudible 04:01:41]. It’s not going to happen.
We can say whatever we want until we’re blue in the face, but half a million Israeli people are not being expelled from [inaudible 04:01:41]. It’s not going to happen.
Mouin Rabbani
My response… You’re basically saying, if I understand correctly, there’s only one way to resolve this, and that is through direct bilateral negotiation?
My response… You’re basically saying, if I understand correctly, there’s only one way to resolve this, and that is through direct bilateral negotiation?
Steven Bonnell
Probably, yeah.
Probably, yeah.
Mouin Rabbani
Okay.
Okay.
Steven Bonnell
Or ideally.
Or ideally.
Mouin Rabbani
So I’ve taken over your house. Okay. You’re not going to go to the police because the law is only of limited value. So you come over and sit in what is now my living room that used to be your living room and we negotiate. The problem there is that you’re not going to get anything unless I agree to it. And standards and norms and law and all the rest of it be damned.
So I’ve taken over your house. Okay. You’re not going to go to the police because the law is only of limited value. So you come over and sit in what is now my living room that used to be your living room and we negotiate. The problem there is that you’re not going to get anything unless I agree to it. And standards and norms and law and all the rest of it be damned.
So you need to take into account that when you’re advocating bilateral negotiations that, effectively, that gives each of the parties veto power. And in the current circumstances, the Palestinians have already recognized Israel.
Steven Bonnell
You keep bringing that up like it’s a significant concession.
You keep bringing that up like it’s a significant concession.
Benny Morris
It’s not true. It’s not true.
It’s not true. It’s not true.
Norman Finkelstein
It’s called the law.
It’s called the law.
Benny Morris
It’s not even true.
It’s not even true.
Norman Finkelstein
It’s called the law.
It’s called the law.
Benny Morris
Even though they signed a piece of paper-
Even though they signed a piece of paper-
Steven Bonnell
The recognition from Palestine isn’t doing anything for-
The recognition from Palestine isn’t doing anything for-
Benny Morris
Hamas totally rejects-
Hamas totally rejects-
Mouin Rabbani
I’m not talking about Hamas.
I’m not talking about Hamas.
Benny Morris
Hamas is the majority among the Palestinian people. They won the elections in 2006.
Hamas is the majority among the Palestinian people. They won the elections in 2006.
Mouin Rabbani
Actually, they won a majority of the seats.
Actually, they won a majority of the seats.
Benny Morris
Yes, exactly.
Yes, exactly.
Mouin Rabbani
They didn’t win a majority of the votes.
They didn’t win a majority of the votes.
Benny Morris
Every opinion poll today says the majority of Palestinians-
Every opinion poll today says the majority of Palestinians-
Mouin Rabbani
That sounds right.
That sounds right.
Benny Morris
… support Hamas.
… support Hamas.
Mouin Rabbani
That sounds right.
That sounds right.
Benny Morris
And Hamas absolutely rejects Israel. So if Arafat, in 2003, 1993 or whatever, issued a sort of recognition of Israel-
And Hamas absolutely rejects Israel. So if Arafat, in 2003, 1993 or whatever, issued a sort of recognition of Israel-
Mouin Rabbani
It wasn’t a sort of recognition.
It wasn’t a sort of recognition.
Benny Morris
Okay, a recognition of Israel. It’s meaningless. It’s meaningless.
Okay, a recognition of Israel. It’s meaningless. It’s meaningless.
Mouin Rabbani
It’s meaningless?
It’s meaningless?
Benny Morris
Anyhow, I don’t believe that Arafat was sincere about it.
Anyhow, I don’t believe that Arafat was sincere about it.
Mouin Rabbani
Does it matter what you or I think about what he felt?
Does it matter what you or I think about what he felt?
Benny Morris
Well, most Israelis do, and that does matter.
Well, most Israelis do, and that does matter.
Mouin Rabbani
Okay.
Okay.
Benny Morris
That does matter. But Hamas says no and Hamas is the majority today.
That does matter. But Hamas says no and Hamas is the majority today.
Mouin Rabbani
So for years, the Israeli and US demand was that the Palestinians recognize 242 and 338. They did. But you’re saying, “Okay, we demanded that they do this, but it was meaningless when they did it.” Then the demand was that-
So for years, the Israeli and US demand was that the Palestinians recognize 242 and 338. They did. But you’re saying, “Okay, we demanded that they do this, but it was meaningless when they did it.” Then the demand was that-
Benny Morris
It was a tactical thing. Yes.
It was a tactical thing. Yes.
Mouin Rabbani
Then the demand was that the PLO recognize Israel.
Then the demand was that the PLO recognize Israel.
Benny Morris
Tactical.
Tactical.
Mouin Rabbani
Okay, we demanded that they did this, and they did it, but it’s meaningless.
Okay, we demanded that they did this, and they did it, but it’s meaningless.
Benny Morris
And they never changed their charter, the PLO. You may remember that.
And they never changed their charter, the PLO. You may remember that.
Mouin Rabbani
In fact, in 19-
In fact, in 19-
Benny Morris
They supposedly abrogated the old charter but never came up with a new one.
They supposedly abrogated the old charter but never came up with a new one.
Mouin Rabbani
No.
No.
Benny Morris
So there’s no new [inaudible 04:04:05].
So there’s no new [inaudible 04:04:05].
Mouin Rabbani
But in 1996-
But in 1996-
Benny Morris
And Farouk Kaddoumi said, “Of course, the old charter is still enforced.”
And Farouk Kaddoumi said, “Of course, the old charter is still enforced.”
Mouin Rabbani
Yes, yes. But the point is, the Palestinians, demands are constantly made of them.
Yes, yes. But the point is, the Palestinians, demands are constantly made of them.
Benny Morris
And of Israel.
And of Israel.
Mouin Rabbani
And when they accede to those demands, they’re then told, “Actually, what you did is meaningless, so here’s a new set of demands.” I mean, it’s like a hamster-
And when they accede to those demands, they’re then told, “Actually, what you did is meaningless, so here’s a new set of demands.” I mean, it’s like a hamster-
Benny Morris
There’s no new set of demands.
There’s no new set of demands.
Mouin Rabbani
It’s like a hamster stuck in a wheel-
It’s like a hamster stuck in a wheel-
Benny Morris
No, no, let me tell you what the bottom line is.
No, no, let me tell you what the bottom line is.
Mouin Rabbani
… that will be told, “If you run fast enough, you’ll get out of the cage.”
… that will be told, “If you run fast enough, you’ll get out of the cage.”
Benny Morris
No, no. The bottom line is that Israel would like a Palestinian Sadat. It wants the Palestinians… Listen. Listen. Just let me finish.
No, no. The bottom line is that Israel would like a Palestinian Sadat. It wants the Palestinians… Listen. Listen. Just let me finish.
Mouin Rabbani
This is really a worst-case scenario that you’re talking about now.
This is really a worst-case scenario that you’re talking about now.
Benny Morris
Okay, let me just… Because they shot Sadat, but anyhow.
Okay, let me just… Because they shot Sadat, but anyhow.
Mouin Rabbani
For good reason.
For good reason.
Benny Morris
The Israelis-
The Israelis-
Steven Bonnell
For good reason?
For good reason?
Benny Morris
… want the Palestinians… Israelis want the Palestinians to actually accept the legitimacy of the state of Israel and the Zionist project and then live side by side with them in two states. That’s what the Israelis… I don’t even know if it’s true-
… want the Palestinians… Israelis want the Palestinians to actually accept the legitimacy of the state of Israel and the Zionist project and then live side by side with them in two states. That’s what the Israelis… I don’t even know if it’s true-
Mouin Rabbani
And what is the formal position-
And what is the formal position-
Benny Morris
I don’t even know if that’s true today because there may be-
I don’t even know if that’s true today because there may be-
Mouin Rabbani
And what is the formal position of this Israeli government?
And what is the formal position of this Israeli government?
Benny Morris
No, no. I’m saying I don’t know if it exists today.
No, no. I’m saying I don’t know if it exists today.
Mouin Rabbani
Okay, its predecessor and its predecessor and its predecessor.
Okay, its predecessor and its predecessor and its predecessor.
Benny Morris
I’m talking about [inaudible 04:05:13].
I’m talking about [inaudible 04:05:13].
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris. Professor Morris.
Professor Morris. Professor Morris.
Mouin Rabbani
Come on.
Come on.
Benny Morris
That’s what Israelis want.
That’s what Israelis want.
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris.
Professor Morris.
Benny Morris
They want a change of psyche among the Palestinians.
They want a change of psyche among the Palestinians.
Norman Finkelstein
Mouin has an interesting-
Mouin has an interesting-
Benny Morris
If that doesn’t happen, there won’t be a Palestinian state. There just won’t be.
If that doesn’t happen, there won’t be a Palestinian state. There just won’t be.
Norman Finkelstein
Mouin has an interesting point.
Mouin has an interesting point.
Benny Morris
Forget international law and all the UN resolutions.
Forget international law and all the UN resolutions.
Norman Finkelstein
I know you want to forget it just like you want to forget the genocide charge. I know you want to forget that.
I know you want to forget it just like you want to forget the genocide charge. I know you want to forget that.
Steven Bonnell
Well, the Palestinians want to forget it too when it doesn’t suit them as well, right?
Well, the Palestinians want to forget it too when it doesn’t suit them as well, right?
Norman Finkelstein
But here’s the problem, and it’s exactly the problem that Mouin just brought up. Now, I read carefully your book, One State, Two States. With all due respect, absolutely a disgrace. Coming from you, coming from you-
But here’s the problem, and it’s exactly the problem that Mouin just brought up. Now, I read carefully your book, One State, Two States. With all due respect, absolutely a disgrace. Coming from you, coming from you-
Benny Morris
Most reviewers didn’t agree with you, though.
Most reviewers didn’t agree with you, though.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah. Coming from you, it was like you wrote it in your sleep. It’s nothing compared to what you wrote before. I don’t know why you did it. In my opinion, you ruined your reputation, not totally, but you undermined it with that book.
Yeah. Coming from you, it was like you wrote it in your sleep. It’s nothing compared to what you wrote before. I don’t know why you did it. In my opinion, you ruined your reputation, not totally, but you undermined it with that book.
But let’s get to the issue that Mouin wrote. Here’s what you said. You said, formally… You said, “Yes, it’s true, the Palestinians recognize Israel.” But then you said, “Viscerally, in their hearts-“
Benny Morris
They don’t.
They don’t.
Norman Finkelstein
“… they didn’t really recognize Israel.” So I thought to myself, “How does Professor Morris know-“
“… they didn’t really recognize Israel.” So I thought to myself, “How does Professor Morris know-“
Mouin Rabbani
Cut open your chest.
Cut open your chest.
Norman Finkelstein
“… what’s in the hearts of Palestinians? I don’t know.”
“… what’s in the hearts of Palestinians? I don’t know.”
Benny Morris
[inaudible 04:06:34].
[inaudible 04:06:34].
Norman Finkelstein
I was surprised, as a historian, you would be talking about what’s lurking in the hearts of Palestinians. But then you said something which was really interesting. You said, “Even if, in their hearts, they accepted Israel,” you said, quote, “Rationally, they could never accept Israel because they got nothing. They had this beautiful Palestine and now they’re reduced to just a few parcels of land. The two-state settlement-“
I was surprised, as a historian, you would be talking about what’s lurking in the hearts of Palestinians. But then you said something which was really interesting. You said, “Even if, in their hearts, they accepted Israel,” you said, quote, “Rationally, they could never accept Israel because they got nothing. They had this beautiful Palestine and now they’re reduced to just a few parcels of land. The two-state settlement-“
Benny Morris
So they will never accept it.
So they will never accept it.
Norman Finkelstein
Yes.
Yes.
Benny Morris
Which is true.
Which is true.
Norman Finkelstein
So you said there’s no way they can accept it.
So you said there’s no way they can accept it.
Benny Morris
No, I would say that as well.
No, I would say that as well.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah.
Yeah.
Benny Morris
The two-state solution, as proposed, doesn’t make any sense.
The two-state solution, as proposed, doesn’t make any sense.
Norman Finkelstein
Exactly as Mouin said, you keep moving the goalposts until we reach the point where we realize, according to Benny Morris, there can’t be a solution. So why don’t you just say that outright? Why don’t you say it outright? According to you, the Palestinians can never be reasonable because according to you-
Exactly as Mouin said, you keep moving the goalposts until we reach the point where we realize, according to Benny Morris, there can’t be a solution. So why don’t you just say that outright? Why don’t you say it outright? According to you, the Palestinians can never be reasonable because according to you-
Benny Morris
They want all of Palestine. That’s why.
They want all of Palestine. That’s why.
Norman Finkelstein
According to you, they couldn’t possibly agree to a two-state settlement because it’s such a lousy settlement. That’s what you say.
According to you, they couldn’t possibly agree to a two-state settlement because it’s such a lousy settlement. That’s what you say.
Benny Morris
Because they want all of Palestine.
Because they want all of Palestine.
Norman Finkelstein
But you said, rationally, they couldn’t accept it, not their feelings.
But you said, rationally, they couldn’t accept it, not their feelings.
Benny Morris
It’s both.
It’s both.
Norman Finkelstein
You said rational. You went from formally, viscerally, rationally. So now we’re reaching the point where, according to Benny Morris, the Palestinians can’t be reasonable because, reasonably, they have to reject two states.
You said rational. You went from formally, viscerally, rationally. So now we’re reaching the point where, according to Benny Morris, the Palestinians can’t be reasonable because, reasonably, they have to reject two states.
Benny Morris
They want all of Palestine.
They want all of Palestine.
Norman Finkelstein
So, Mouin is absolutely correct. There’s no way to resolve the problem, according to your logic.
So, Mouin is absolutely correct. There’s no way to resolve the problem, according to your logic.
Benny Morris
They want all of Palestine. He said that himself. He said they should dismantle Israel.
They want all of Palestine. He said that himself. He said they should dismantle Israel.
Norman Finkelstein
I’m talking about-
I’m talking about-
Benny Morris
That’s what he’s saying.
That’s what he’s saying.
Mouin Rabbani
What I said-
What I said-
Norman Finkelstein
He didn’t say that.
He didn’t say that.
Benny Morris
Dismantle Israel.
Dismantle Israel.
Mouin Rabbani
What I said, and I’ve written-
What I said, and I’ve written-
Norman Finkelstein
I’m glad you didn’t deny it. Go ahead.
I’m glad you didn’t deny it. Go ahead.
Mouin Rabbani
I’ve written extensively on this issue, on why a two-state settlement is still feasible, and I came out in support of that proposition. Perhaps in my heart, you can see that I was just bullshitting, but that’s what I actually wrote. That was a number of years ago.
I’ve written extensively on this issue, on why a two-state settlement is still feasible, and I came out in support of that proposition. Perhaps in my heart, you can see that I was just bullshitting, but that’s what I actually wrote. That was a number of years ago.
And just as a matter of historical record, beginning in the early 1970s, there was fierce debate within the Palestinian national movement about whether to accept or reject. And there were three schools of thought. There was one that would accept nothing less than the total liberation of Palestine. There was a second that accepted what was called the establishment of a fighting national authority on Palestinian soil, which they saw-
Benny Morris
As a springboard.
As a springboard.
Mouin Rabbani
… as a springboard for the total liberation of Palestine. And there was a third school that believed that, under current dynamics and so on, that they should go for a two-state settlement. And our friend and correspondent [inaudible 04:09:41] has written a very perceptive article on when the PLO, already in 1976, came out in open support of a two-state resolution at the Security Council. PLO accepted it. Israel, of course, rejected it. But the resolution didn’t pass because the US and the UK vetoed it. It was both of them.
… as a springboard for the total liberation of Palestine. And there was a third school that believed that, under current dynamics and so on, that they should go for a two-state settlement. And our friend and correspondent [inaudible 04:09:41] has written a very perceptive article on when the PLO, already in 1976, came out in open support of a two-state resolution at the Security Council. PLO accepted it. Israel, of course, rejected it. But the resolution didn’t pass because the US and the UK vetoed it. It was both of them.
Norman Finkelstein
I think it was nine to five [inaudible 04:10:06].
I think it was nine to five [inaudible 04:10:06].
Mouin Rabbani
Ah, okay. Yeah. But fact of the matter is that the PLO came to accept a two-state settlement. Why they did it I think is irrelevant. And subsequently, the PLO acted on the basis of seeking to achieve a two-state settlement. The reason, I think, and I think Norm, you’ve written about this, the reason that Arafat was so insistent on getting minimally acceptable terms for a two-state settlement at Camp David and afterwards was precisely because he knew that once he signed, that was all the Palestinians were going to get. If his intention had been, “I’m not accepting Israel. I simply want to springboard,” he would’ve accepted a Palestinian state in Jericho, but he didn’t. He insisted-
Ah, okay. Yeah. But fact of the matter is that the PLO came to accept a two-state settlement. Why they did it I think is irrelevant. And subsequently, the PLO acted on the basis of seeking to achieve a two-state settlement. The reason, I think, and I think Norm, you’ve written about this, the reason that Arafat was so insistent on getting minimally acceptable terms for a two-state settlement at Camp David and afterwards was precisely because he knew that once he signed, that was all the Palestinians were going to get. If his intention had been, “I’m not accepting Israel. I simply want to springboard,” he would’ve accepted a Palestinian state in Jericho, but he didn’t. He insisted-
Benny Morris
That’s something I’ve never understood. He should have logically accepted the springboard, and then from there, launched his next stage.
That’s something I’ve never understood. He should have logically accepted the springboard, and then from there, launched his next stage.
Norman Finkelstein
No, he understood what you don’t understand.
No, he understood what you don’t understand.
Benny Morris
He should’ve done that.
He should’ve done that.
Norman Finkelstein
He understood international law would put a real constraint on him once he accepted it was over.
He understood international law would put a real constraint on him once he accepted it was over.
Benny Morris
No, but also, I think, constitutionally, he was incapable of signing.
No, but also, I think, constitutionally, he was incapable of signing.
Norman Finkelstein
I don’t know that.
I don’t know that.
Benny Morris
You’re right that he should have-
You’re right that he should have-
Norman Finkelstein
I’m not his [inaudible 04:11:21].
I’m not his [inaudible 04:11:21].
Benny Morris
… accepted it.
… accepted it.
Mouin Rabbani
But if you’re correct, okay, that he was really out to-
But if you’re correct, okay, that he was really out to-
Benny Morris
[inaudible 04:11:26].
[inaudible 04:11:26].
Mouin Rabbani
… eliminate Israel, then he wouldn’t have cared about the borders. He wouldn’t have cared about what the thing said about refugees. He would’ve gotten a sovereign state and used that to achieve that purpose.
… eliminate Israel, then he wouldn’t have cared about the borders. He wouldn’t have cared about what the thing said about refugees. He would’ve gotten a sovereign state and used that to achieve that purpose.
Norman Finkelstein
The springboard.
The springboard.
Mouin Rabbani
But I think it was precisely because he recognized that he was not negotiating for a springboard, he was negotiating permanent status, that he was such a stickler about the details.
But I think it was precisely because he recognized that he was not negotiating for a springboard, he was negotiating permanent status, that he was such a stickler about the details.
Norman Finkelstein
Just as a factual matter, he wasn’t such a stickler. When they asked him how many refugees, the numbers at the-
Just as a factual matter, he wasn’t such a stickler. When they asked him how many refugees, the numbers at the-
Mouin Rabbani
It was the principle rather than the numbers.
It was the principle rather than the numbers.
Norman Finkelstein
It was the principle.
It was the principle.
Benny Morris
He said they would be pragmatic about it. [inaudible 04:12:00].
He said they would be pragmatic about it. [inaudible 04:12:00].
Norman Finkelstein
Yes. And the numbers that were used at Annapolis were between 100 and 250,000 refugees over 10 years. That was the number. Arafat, when he was asked at Camp David, he kept saying, “I care about the Lebanese… the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon,” which came to about 300,000.
Yes. And the numbers that were used at Annapolis were between 100 and 250,000 refugees over 10 years. That was the number. Arafat, when he was asked at Camp David, he kept saying, “I care about the Lebanese… the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon,” which came to about 300,000.
Mouin Rabbani
Those were his priority.
Those were his priority.
Norman Finkelstein
Which was a large concession from… whether you accept the number or not, that he wasn’t talking about 6 million. He was talking about between 100 and 250,000 over 10 years. Now, the best offer that came from the Palestinians… Excuse me, the best offer that came from Israel was the Olmert offer.
Which was a large concession from… whether you accept the number or not, that he wasn’t talking about 6 million. He was talking about between 100 and 250,000 over 10 years. Now, the best offer that came from the Palestinians… Excuse me, the best offer that came from Israel was the Olmert offer.
Lex Fridman
Can we just pretend like we didn’t all lay out the exceptionally pessimistic view of a two-state… Hold on a second. Two-state solution? Let’s pretend that in five years, in 10 years, a two-state peace settlement is reached. And as historians, you’ll still be here writing about it 20 years from now. How would it have happened?
Can we just pretend like we didn’t all lay out the exceptionally pessimistic view of a two-state… Hold on a second. Two-state solution? Let’s pretend that in five years, in 10 years, a two-state peace settlement is reached. And as historians, you’ll still be here writing about it 20 years from now. How would it have happened?
Steven Bonnell
I think that, historically, I think that the big issue is I think that both sides have had their own internal motivations to fight because they feel like they have something to gain from it. But I think as time has gone on, unfortunately, the record proves that the Palestinian side is delusional. The longer that the conflict endures, the worse position they’ll be in.
I think that, historically, I think that the big issue is I think that both sides have had their own internal motivations to fight because they feel like they have something to gain from it. But I think as time has gone on, unfortunately, the record proves that the Palestinian side is delusional. The longer that the conflict endures, the worse position they’ll be in.
But for some reason, they’ve never had a leader that convinced them of that as much, that Arafat thought that if he held on, there was always a better deal around the corner, that Abbas is more concerned with trying to maintain any legitimacy amongst Palestinians than actually trying to negotiate anything realistic with Israel, that Palestinians are always incentivized to feel like as long as they keep fighting, either the international community is going to save them with the 5 millionth UN resolution condemning whatever, that another ICJ advisory opinion is finally going to lead to the expulsion of half a million Jews from the West Bank, or that some other international body, the ICJ and the genocide charge, is going to come and save the Palestinians.
As long as they, in their mind, feel like somebody is coming to save them, then they feel like they’re going to have the ability to get something better in the future. But the reality is all of the good partners for peace that the Palestinians had have completely and utterly abandoned them; Egypt, Jordan, the Gulf states. Whether you’re talking bilateral peace or the Abraham Accords, most of the Arab leaders, in negotiating peace with Israel, have just not had as much of an interest in maintaining the rights and the representations of what the Palestinian people want.
And the only people they have today to draw legitimacy from or to have on their side to argue with them are people that, I guess, write books or tweet or people in the international community that do resolutions or Amnesty International reports. And the reality is, we can scream until we’re blue in the face on these things, none of it has gotten any closer to helping the Palestinians in any sense of the word.
The condition has only gotten worse. The settlements only continue to expand. The military operations are only to get more brutal. The blockade is going to continue to have worse effects. As long as we use international law as the basis and there isn’t a strong Sadat-like Palestinian leader that’s willing to come up and confront Israel with the brave, peaceful negotiations to force them to acquiesce, nothing is going to happen.
And I think that the issue you come up with is, whether it’s people like Norm that talk about how brave the October 7th attacks were or how much respect they have for those fighters, Israel, in a way… And I think people have said as much about Netanyahu. The right wants violence from the Palestinians because it always gives them a perpetual excuse to further the conflict.
“Well, we have to go in on October 7th and we’ve got to remove Hamas. Well, we can’t trust these people in the West. We have to do the night raids because the Second Intifada made us feel like the Palestinian people didn’t want trust with us.”
I feel like the biggest thing that would force Israel to change its path would be an actual, a real… not for two weeks, but an actual peaceful Palestinian leader, somebody committed to peace, that is able to apply those standards and hold the entire region of Palestine to those standards. Because I think, over time, the mounting pressure from without the international community and the mounting pressure from within because Israel hosts a lot of its own criticism, if we talk about B’Tselem, we talk about Haaretz, Israel will host a lot of its own criticism.
I think that that pressure would force Israel towards an actual peace agreement, but it’s never going to come through violence. Historically, it hasn’t. And in the modern day, violence has just hurt the Palestinians more and more.
Lex Fridman
If you paint a picture of the future, now is a good moment for both Palestine and Israel to get new leadership. Netanyahu’s on the way out, Hamas possibly is on the way out. Who should rise to the top such that a peaceful settlement can be reached? And I’d love to [inaudible 04:16:33].
If you paint a picture of the future, now is a good moment for both Palestine and Israel to get new leadership. Netanyahu’s on the way out, Hamas possibly is on the way out. Who should rise to the top such that a peaceful settlement can be reached? And I’d love to [inaudible 04:16:33].
Steven Bonnell
The problem is, as Benny said, yeah, it’s difficult because Hamas enjoys so much widespread support amongst the Palestinian people. I think that… Well, I don’t know. There’s opinions on whether democracy or pushing them towards elections was the right or wrong idea. But with an Islamic fundamentalist government for Hamas, I don’t know if a negotiation with Israel ever happens there.
The problem is, as Benny said, yeah, it’s difficult because Hamas enjoys so much widespread support amongst the Palestinian people. I think that… Well, I don’t know. There’s opinions on whether democracy or pushing them towards elections was the right or wrong idea. But with an Islamic fundamentalist government for Hamas, I don’t know if a negotiation with Israel ever happens there.
And then when the international pressure is always ’67 borders, infinite right of return for refugees, and a total withdrawal of Israel from all these lands to even start negotiations, I just don’t see, realistically, on the Palestinian side, no negotiations are ever going to start in a place that Israel’s willing to accept.
Mouin Rabbani
If you want to dismiss international law, that’s fine, but then you have to do it consistently. You can’t set standards for the Palestinians but reject applying those standards to Israel. If we’re going to have the law of the jungle, then we can all be beasts and not only some of us. So it’s either that or you have certain agreed standards that are intended to regulate our conduct, all of our conduct, not just some of us. So that’s a fundamental-
If you want to dismiss international law, that’s fine, but then you have to do it consistently. You can’t set standards for the Palestinians but reject applying those standards to Israel. If we’re going to have the law of the jungle, then we can all be beasts and not only some of us. So it’s either that or you have certain agreed standards that are intended to regulate our conduct, all of our conduct, not just some of us. So that’s a fundamental-
Steven Bonnell
[inaudible 04:17:46] I’m saying to abandon?
[inaudible 04:17:46] I’m saying to abandon?
Mouin Rabbani
Well, you’re saying international law and the millionth UN resolution, you’re being very dismissive about all these things.
Well, you’re saying international law and the millionth UN resolution, you’re being very dismissive about all these things.
Steven Bonnell
Well, I’m saying [inaudible 04:17:54]-
Well, I’m saying [inaudible 04:17:54]-
Mouin Rabbani
And that’s fine.
And that’s fine.
Steven Bonnell
I’m not being dismissive.
I’m not being dismissive.
Mouin Rabbani
But then you have to be dismissive across the board.
But then you have to be dismissive across the board.
Steven Bonnell
I’m just saying, for instance, 242, that was a Chapter VI resolution. That’s non-binding. But 242 [inaudible 04:18:01]-
I’m just saying, for instance, 242, that was a Chapter VI resolution. That’s non-binding. But 242 [inaudible 04:18:01]-
Mouin Rabbani
It’s binding.
It’s binding.
Steven Bonnell
It’s absolutely not binding.
It’s absolutely not binding.
Mouin Rabbani
It’s binding.
It’s binding.
Norman Finkelstein
What is binding? Do you know anything about how the UN system works?
What is binding? Do you know anything about how the UN system works?
Steven Bonnell
If you read the language of the resolution, binding is typically if it commits you to upholding a particular international law or if it establishes [inaudible 04:18:13].
If you read the language of the resolution, binding is typically if it commits you to upholding a particular international law or if it establishes [inaudible 04:18:13].
Norman Finkelstein
What is Chapter VI? You just throw out words. You hear binding, not binding.
What is Chapter VI? You just throw out words. You hear binding, not binding.
Steven Bonnell
Does 424 mention a Palestinian state?
Does 424 mention a Palestinian state?
Mouin Rabbani
Norm-
Norm-
Norman Finkelstein
Of course not.
Of course not.
Mouin Rabbani
That’s part of the problem.
That’s part of the problem.
Steven Bonnell
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, exactly.
Norman Finkelstein
That was the reason why the Palestinians didn’t want to recognize 242 because they only referred, at the very end, the refugee problem.
That was the reason why the Palestinians didn’t want to recognize 242 because they only referred, at the very end, the refugee problem.
Steven Bonnell
Sure, but the PLO recognized 181 and 242 [inaudible 04:18:31].
Sure, but the PLO recognized 181 and 242 [inaudible 04:18:31].
Mouin Rabbani
Yeah, but hold on. Hold on. Every United Nations Security Council resolution, irrespective of under which chapter it was adopted, is, by definition, binding. Binding not only on the members of the Security Council but on every member state of the UN. Read the UN Charter. It’s black and white.
Yeah, but hold on. Hold on. Every United Nations Security Council resolution, irrespective of under which chapter it was adopted, is, by definition, binding. Binding not only on the members of the Security Council but on every member state of the UN. Read the UN Charter. It’s black and white.
Steven Bonnell
Sure. People can look that up [inaudible 04:18:53]-
Sure. People can look that up [inaudible 04:18:53]-
Mouin Rabbani
Yes.
Yes.
Steven Bonnell
… but the language even of 242 is kept intentionally vague such that it doesn’t actually provide, again, the final [inaudible 04:18:59]-
… but the language even of 242 is kept intentionally vague such that it doesn’t actually provide, again, the final [inaudible 04:18:59]-
Mouin Rabbani
It’s actually not that vague-
It’s actually not that vague-
Steven Bonnell
It’s incredibly vague.
It’s incredibly vague.
Mouin Rabbani
… because the term “land for peace” originates in 242. The idea is-
… because the term “land for peace” originates in 242. The idea is-
Steven Bonnell
Sure, but the part about territorial acquisition and Israel’s need to give it up was kept vague. That’s why, in ’79, Israel thought that they fulfilled their obligations under 242 [inaudible 04:19:13]-
Sure, but the part about territorial acquisition and Israel’s need to give it up was kept vague. That’s why, in ’79, Israel thought that they fulfilled their obligations under 242 [inaudible 04:19:13]-
Mouin Rabbani
You asked a separate question.
You asked a separate question.
Norman Finkelstein
Allow me points of information. The first principle in UN Resolution 242 is that the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force-
Allow me points of information. The first principle in UN Resolution 242 is that the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force-
Steven Bonnell
Which is meaningless.
Which is meaningless.
Norman Finkelstein
It may be meaningless to you, Mr. Bonnell.
It may be meaningless to you, Mr. Bonnell.
Steven Bonnell
It was meaningless to everyone in the region.
It was meaningless to everyone in the region.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. Mr. Bonnell, that principle was adopted by the Friendly Nations Resolution, the UN General Assembly in 1970. That resolution was then reiterated in the International Court of Justice ruling, advisory opinion in 2004. That was the basis of the coalition against Iraq when it acquired Kuwait and then declared it a province of Kuwait.
Okay. Mr. Bonnell, that principle was adopted by the Friendly Nations Resolution, the UN General Assembly in 1970. That resolution was then reiterated in the International Court of Justice ruling, advisory opinion in 2004. That was the basis of the coalition against Iraq when it acquired Kuwait and then declared it a province of Kuwait.
Steven Bonnell
Which Arafat supported.
Which Arafat supported.
Norman Finkelstein
That’s what’s called-
That’s what’s called-
Benny Morris
That’s true. Arafat did-
That’s true. Arafat did-
Steven Bonnell
Arafat did support it.
Arafat did support it.
Benny Morris
Arafat did support it.
Arafat did support it.
Steven Bonnell
[inaudible 04:20:11].
[inaudible 04:20:11].
Norman Finkelstein
It’s not accurate. I’m not going to go there. I’m not going to go there.
It’s not accurate. I’m not going to go there. I’m not going to go there.
Steven Bonnell
It’s not accurate that Arafat endorsed-
It’s not accurate that Arafat endorsed-
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, I’m not going to go there.
Okay, I’m not going to go there.
Steven Bonnell
Okay. [inaudible 04:20:18].
Okay. [inaudible 04:20:18].
Norman Finkelstein
It’s called, under international law, jus cogens or peremptory norms of international law, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war. That is not controversial. It’s not vague. You couldn’t put it more succinctly. You cannot acquire territory by force under international law.
It’s called, under international law, jus cogens or peremptory norms of international law, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war. That is not controversial. It’s not vague. You couldn’t put it more succinctly. You cannot acquire territory by force under international law.
Steven Bonnell
On the West Bank before ’67, who owned the Gaza Strip before ’67?
On the West Bank before ’67, who owned the Gaza Strip before ’67?
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Bonnell, don’t change the subject. If you don’t know what you’re talking about-
Mr. Bonnell, don’t change the subject. If you don’t know what you’re talking about-
Steven Bonnell
It’s not about [inaudible 04:20:50]-
It’s not about [inaudible 04:20:50]-
Norman Finkelstein
… at least have the humility-
… at least have the humility-
Steven Bonnell
How close has 242-
How close has 242-
Norman Finkelstein
You talk about Chapter VI-
You talk about Chapter VI-
Steven Bonnell
How close has 242 gotten-
How close has 242 gotten-
Norman Finkelstein
You don’t know Chapter VI-
You don’t know Chapter VI-
Steven Bonnell
How close has 242 gotten the Palestinians to peace?
How close has 242 gotten the Palestinians to peace?
Norman Finkelstein
You don’t know Chapter VI from tweet five. You have no idea what you’re talking about. It’s just so embarrassing. At least have some humility. Between us who have read maybe 10,000 books on the topic and you’ve read two Wikipedia entries and you start talking about Chapter VI. Do you know what Chapter VII is?
You don’t know Chapter VI from tweet five. You have no idea what you’re talking about. It’s just so embarrassing. At least have some humility. Between us who have read maybe 10,000 books on the topic and you’ve read two Wikipedia entries and you start talking about Chapter VI. Do you know what Chapter VII is?
Steven Bonnell
Answer me. Answer the question.
Answer me. Answer the question.
Norman Finkelstein
Do you know what Chapter VII is?
Do you know what Chapter VII is?
Steven Bonnell
Norm, answer the question. How close has 242 gotten the Palestinians to a state?
Norm, answer the question. How close has 242 gotten the Palestinians to a state?
Mouin Rabbani
Let me ask you this.
Let me ask you this.
Steven Bonnell
How close has the 2004 advisory opinion gotten the West Bank settlement [inaudible 04:21:26]?
How close has the 2004 advisory opinion gotten the West Bank settlement [inaudible 04:21:26]?
Mouin Rabbani
What’s your alternative?
What’s your alternative?
Steven Bonnell
The alternative is not this, whatever this making money off the conflict is. The actual alternative-
The alternative is not this, whatever this making money off the conflict is. The actual alternative-
Norman Finkelstein
[inaudible 04:21:33] making money-
[inaudible 04:21:33] making money-
Steven Bonnell
The actual alternative-
The actual alternative-
Norman Finkelstein
Destiny should talk about making money off of idiocy.
Destiny should talk about making money off of idiocy.
Steven Bonnell
Yes. Yeah, you’re a media [inaudible 04:21:37] when you go and talk to 50 million different people about your awesome [inaudible 04:21:40].
Yes. Yeah, you’re a media [inaudible 04:21:37] when you go and talk to 50 million different people about your awesome [inaudible 04:21:40].
Benny Morris
But he has a point, though.
But he has a point, though.
Norman Finkelstein
What point?
What point?
Steven Bonnell
But the issue is you have to negotiate-
But the issue is you have to negotiate-
Benny Morris
All these resolutions have gotten the Palestinians no closer to a state.
All these resolutions have gotten the Palestinians no closer to a state.
Steven Bonnell
Nothing.
Nothing.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah, but hold on. Because they haven’t been enforced because of the US veto.
Yeah, but hold on. Because they haven’t been enforced because of the US veto.
Benny Morris
They’re not going to be enforced.
They’re not going to be enforced.
Norman Finkelstein
Wait, wait, wait, wait.
Wait, wait, wait, wait.
Benny Morris
They’ve gotten nowhere-
They’ve gotten nowhere-
Mouin Rabbani
If I may, if I may-
If I may, if I may-
Steven Bonnell
[inaudible 04:21:52].
[inaudible 04:21:52].
Norman Finkelstein
You know what? You know what? Professor Morris-
You know what? You know what? Professor Morris-
Steven Bonnell
[inaudible 04:21:58] about the case for genocide.
[inaudible 04:21:58] about the case for genocide.
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris, because of your logic, and I’m not disputing it, that’s why October 7th happened.
Professor Morris, because of your logic, and I’m not disputing it, that’s why October 7th happened.
Benny Morris
Oh my God.
Oh my God.
Norman Finkelstein
Because there was no options left for those people. Exactly what Mouin said.
Because there was no options left for those people. Exactly what Mouin said.
Benny Morris
And now what options are left? After October 7th-
And now what options are left? After October 7th-
Steven Bonnell
This has been the Palestinian mentality for 60 years.
This has been the Palestinian mentality for 60 years.
Benny Morris
… what’s the options left?
… what’s the options left?
Steven Bonnell
The only option is conflict.
The only option is conflict.
Norman Finkelstein
Listen to this.
Listen to this.
Steven Bonnell
The only option is combat.
The only option is combat.
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Bonnell is now an expert on Palestinian mentality.
Mr. Bonnell is now an expert on Palestinian mentality.
Mouin Rabbani
Hold on. You’re contradicting yourself.
Hold on. You’re contradicting yourself.
Norman Finkelstein
You know as much about Palestinian politics as you know about Chapter V.
You know as much about Palestinian politics as you know about Chapter V.
Steven Bonnell
I only deal with facts. I only deal with facts. Egypt didn’t find it necessary to-
I only deal with facts. I only deal with facts. Egypt didn’t find it necessary to-
Norman Finkelstein
Tell me about Chapter V.
Tell me about Chapter V.
Steven Bonnell
Egypt didn’t find it necessary-
Egypt didn’t find it necessary-
Norman Finkelstein
Tell me about Chapter V.
Tell me about Chapter V.
Steven Bonnell
… to negotiate peace [inaudible 04:22:34] the Palestinians. Jordan didn’t find it necessary to negotiate peace [inaudible 04:22:36] the Palestinians.
… to negotiate peace [inaudible 04:22:34] the Palestinians. Jordan didn’t find it necessary to negotiate peace [inaudible 04:22:36] the Palestinians.
Mouin Rabbani
Hey, if I may-
Hey, if I may-
Steven Bonnell
The Abraham Accords [inaudible 04:22:37] the Palestinians-
The Abraham Accords [inaudible 04:22:37] the Palestinians-
Norman Finkelstein
Talk faster, faster, faster, faster.
Talk faster, faster, faster, faster.
Steven Bonnell
… despite all of the international law-
… despite all of the international law-
Lex Fridman
Everybody, Mouin.
Everybody, Mouin.
Norman Finkelstein
Faster.
Faster.
Mouin Rabbani
You’re contradicting yourself. On the one hand, you’re saying all the Palestinians do is fight and violence and terrorism and all the rest of it, but on the other hand, you’re saying they’re expecting salvation from UN resolutions and international court. Those aren’t violent.
You’re contradicting yourself. On the one hand, you’re saying all the Palestinians do is fight and violence and terrorism and all the rest of it, but on the other hand, you’re saying they’re expecting salvation from UN resolutions and international court. Those aren’t violent.
Norman Finkelstein
It’s the law.
It’s the law.
Steven Bonnell
No, but it’s part of maintaining-
No, but it’s part of maintaining-
Norman Finkelstein
It’s the law.
It’s the law.
Steven Bonnell
It’s the continual putting off of negotiating any solution.
It’s the continual putting off of negotiating any solution.
Norman Finkelstein
[inaudible 04:23:06].
[inaudible 04:23:06].
Mouin Rabbani
They’ve negotiated.
They’ve negotiated.
Steven Bonnell
As in when Arafat takes 10 days to respond-
As in when Arafat takes 10 days to respond-
Norman Finkelstein
I think he said-
I think he said-
Steven Bonnell
When Arafat takes 10 days to respond and hops on a jet all over the world to go and visit his friends, yes.
When Arafat takes 10 days to respond and hops on a jet all over the world to go and visit his friends, yes.
Norman Finkelstein
I think Mouin said-
I think Mouin said-
Steven Bonnell
But it’s for putting the conflict off indefinitely.
But it’s for putting the conflict off indefinitely.
Norman Finkelstein
… they accepted two states in 1975. Brace yourself.
… they accepted two states in 1975. Brace yourself.
Benny Morris
They didn’t.
They didn’t.
Steven Bonnell
Why didn’t they accept the Taba Summit then?
Why didn’t they accept the Taba Summit then?
Norman Finkelstein
Brace yourself. That’s 50 years ago.
Brace yourself. That’s 50 years ago.
Steven Bonnell
Why didn’t they accept the Camp David [inaudible 04:23:19]?
Why didn’t they accept the Camp David [inaudible 04:23:19]?
Benny Morris
This is a legend.
This is a legend.
Norman Finkelstein
That’s a half-century ago.
That’s a half-century ago.
Benny Morris
No, no, they didn’t accept a two-state solution [inaudible 04:23:26].
No, no, they didn’t accept a two-state solution [inaudible 04:23:26].
Norman Finkelstein
He quoted a very good article [inaudible 04:23:28].
He quoted a very good article [inaudible 04:23:28].
Steven Bonnell
You can quote Arafat talking about how he’s lying and he’s just going to use… In ’94 and ’95 when he’s making trips around the world, how he just wanted [inaudible 04:23:35] starting ground.
You can quote Arafat talking about how he’s lying and he’s just going to use… In ’94 and ’95 when he’s making trips around the world, how he just wanted [inaudible 04:23:35] starting ground.
Norman Finkelstein
Talk faster. Talk faster.
Talk faster. Talk faster.
Steven Bonnell
I’m sorry. I can’t talk slow. You can watch [inaudible 04:23:38] and slow it down to 0.5 speed if you don’t understand what I’m saying.
I’m sorry. I can’t talk slow. You can watch [inaudible 04:23:38] and slow it down to 0.5 speed if you don’t understand what I’m saying.
Norman Finkelstein
Faster. Faster.
Faster. Faster.
Mouin Rabbani
There’s a very lengthy history-
There’s a very lengthy history-
Norman Finkelstein
Motor mouth.
Motor mouth.
Mouin Rabbani
… of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. You want to deny that those negotiations took place.
… of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. You want to deny that those negotiations took place.
Steven Bonnell
Where it feels like there was a good-faith effort-
Where it feels like there was a good-faith effort-
Norman Finkelstein
What it feels like.
What it feels like.
Steven Bonnell
Where there was a good-faith effort-
Where there was a good-faith effort-
Norman Finkelstein
Feels like.
Feels like.
Steven Bonnell
Where there was a good-faith effort-
Where there was a good-faith effort-
Norman Finkelstein
We have a written record.
We have a written record.
Steven Bonnell
With all due respect-
With all due respect-
Norman Finkelstein
We have a written record, Mr. Bonnell.
We have a written record, Mr. Bonnell.
Steven Bonnell
Mr. Pop History, you can’t even read the written records. I don’t know why you’re referring to them. Okay.
Mr. Pop History, you can’t even read the written records. I don’t know why you’re referring to them. Okay.
Norman Finkelstein
Excuse me? I just said there are 15,000 pages on Annapolis.
Excuse me? I just said there are 15,000 pages on Annapolis.
Steven Bonnell
And I’m sure you cherry-picked your favorite quotes from all of them. Okay.
And I’m sure you cherry-picked your favorite quotes from all of them. Okay.
Norman Finkelstein
I don’t cherry-pick.
I don’t cherry-pick.
Steven Bonnell
That’s great. That’s great.
That’s great. That’s great.
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Bonnell, at least I had a quote to cherry-pick.
Mr. Bonnell, at least I had a quote to cherry-pick.
Steven Bonnell
That’s great. [inaudible 04:24:12].
That’s great. [inaudible 04:24:12].
Norman Finkelstein
All you have is Wikipedia.
All you have is Wikipedia.
Steven Bonnell
I gave you quotes.
I gave you quotes.
Norman Finkelstein
All you have is Wikipedia.
All you have is Wikipedia.
Steven Bonnell
Do you want quotes? Find me the information that shows the Palestinian cause has been furthered by any international law. You can’t do it.
Do you want quotes? Find me the information that shows the Palestinian cause has been furthered by any international law. You can’t do it.
Mouin Rabbani
I think the problem is different. Okay. You want to say the Palestinians were only fighting. And then when I point out they’ve also gone to the court and the UN, you say, “Well, all they do then is these things and they should be negotiating.” And I demonstrate that there was a lengthy record of negotiations. You said, “Yeah, but they didn’t go in good faith.” Again, you’re placing the hamster in the wheel and telling him if he runs fast enough, maybe one day he’ll get out of the cage.
I think the problem is different. Okay. You want to say the Palestinians were only fighting. And then when I point out they’ve also gone to the court and the UN, you say, “Well, all they do then is these things and they should be negotiating.” And I demonstrate that there was a lengthy record of negotiations. You said, “Yeah, but they didn’t go in good faith.” Again, you’re placing the hamster in the wheel and telling him if he runs fast enough, maybe one day he’ll get out of the cage.
Steven Bonnell
What was the best good-faith negotiation on the side of the-
What was the best good-faith negotiation on the side of the-
Mouin Rabbani
Okay. Please, if I could just finish. I think the fundamental problem here is not what the Palestinians have and haven’t done, and it’s perfectly legitimate to have a discussion about whether they could have been more effective. Of course, they could have been more effective. Everyone could have always been more effective. The fundamental issue here is that Israel has never been prepared to concede the legitimacy of Palestinian national rights in the land of the former British mandate of Palestine.
Okay. Please, if I could just finish. I think the fundamental problem here is not what the Palestinians have and haven’t done, and it’s perfectly legitimate to have a discussion about whether they could have been more effective. Of course, they could have been more effective. Everyone could have always been more effective. The fundamental issue here is that Israel has never been prepared to concede the legitimacy of Palestinian national rights in the land of the former British mandate of Palestine.
Steven Bonnell
Then how do you explain Taba Summit? How do you explain Camp David?
Then how do you explain Taba Summit? How do you explain Camp David?
Benny Morris
No, Barack and Olmert did accept the legitimacy-
No, Barack and Olmert did accept the legitimacy-
Steven Bonnell
How do you explain Olmert’s offer to Abbas? Yeah.
How do you explain Olmert’s offer to Abbas? Yeah.
Benny Morris
… of Palestinian demands. But they didn’t want to give the Palestinians all of Palestine, that’s all.
… of Palestinian demands. But they didn’t want to give the Palestinians all of Palestine, that’s all.
Norman Finkelstein
No, all of Palestine? No, no.
No, all of Palestine? No, no.
Mouin Rabbani
You mean all of the occupied territories?
You mean all of the occupied territories?
Benny Morris
You’re talking about all of Palestine being occupied territory?
You’re talking about all of Palestine being occupied territory?
Steven Bonnell
Wait. What is the occupied territories?
Wait. What is the occupied territories?
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris.
Professor Morris.
Mouin Rabbani
The occupied territories-
The occupied territories-
Steven Bonnell
Is that all of Israel?
Is that all of Israel?
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris, could you show me-
Professor Morris, could you show me-
Mouin Rabbani
The occupied territories are those territories that Israel occupied in June of 1967.
The occupied territories are those territories that Israel occupied in June of 1967.
Norman Finkelstein
Could you show me-
Could you show me-
Benny Morris
Palestinians often use that term to define the whole of Palestine, not just the West Bank.
Palestinians often use that term to define the whole of Palestine, not just the West Bank.
Norman Finkelstein
Could you show me, Professor Morris, in all the negotiations, all the negotiations and all the accounts that have been written, can you show me one where the Palestinians in the negotiations, because that’s what we were talking about, wanted all of Israel? The maximum-
Could you show me, Professor Morris, in all the negotiations, all the negotiations and all the accounts that have been written, can you show me one where the Palestinians in the negotiations, because that’s what we were talking about, wanted all of Israel? The maximum-
Benny Morris
They can’t say that because the international community won’t accept it.
They can’t say that because the international community won’t accept it.
Norman Finkelstein
Oh, so you know it because you know what-
Oh, so you know it because you know what-
Mouin Rabbani
So they didn’t say it. They didn’t ask for it.
So they didn’t say it. They didn’t ask for it.
Norman Finkelstein
… but you know what’s in their hearts.
… but you know what’s in their hearts.
Benny Morris
No, Hamas did. Hamas always said all of it.
No, Hamas did. Hamas always said all of it.
Mouin Rabbani
Hamas only negotiated with Israel about prisoner exchanges [inaudible 04:26:36].
Hamas only negotiated with Israel about prisoner exchanges [inaudible 04:26:36].
Benny Morris
No, I know. But they represent-
No, I know. But they represent-
Norman Finkelstein
So we were talking about the negotiations.
So we were talking about the negotiations.
Benny Morris
… a lot of the Palestinian people, you will agree.
… a lot of the Palestinian people, you will agree.
Norman Finkelstein
The only place I saw pieces of Israel were the land swaps, and the land swaps accounted for about 2-5% of Israel. Nobody asked for all of Israel. Why do you say things like that?
The only place I saw pieces of Israel were the land swaps, and the land swaps accounted for about 2-5% of Israel. Nobody asked for all of Israel. Why do you say things like that?
Steven Bonnell
What do you mean? They asked for all of Israel in ’48. They asked for all of Israel in ’67. What do you think those reports were about?
What do you mean? They asked for all of Israel in ’48. They asked for all of Israel in ’67. What do you think those reports were about?
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. Mr. Bonnell, you talk so-
Okay. Mr. Bonnell, you talk so-
Steven Bonnell
You’re not going to respond to anything I’m saying because you have no answer.
You’re not going to respond to anything I’m saying because you have no answer.
Norman Finkelstein
I’ll respond to you. Okay. Mr. Bonnell, we were talking about the diplomatic negotiations beginning with 2001.
I’ll respond to you. Okay. Mr. Bonnell, we were talking about the diplomatic negotiations beginning with 2001.
Steven Bonnell
Yes, I understand, but you can’t pretend that the first ask for Israel was in diplomacy. It was through war.
Yes, I understand, but you can’t pretend that the first ask for Israel was in diplomacy. It was through war.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
Okay. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
Steven Bonnell
Is the international law argument ever going to get the Palestinians closer to state? Is the Israeli state ever going to be dismantled? Do you think that’s realistic coming up, ever, in the next 20 years?
Is the international law argument ever going to get the Palestinians closer to state? Is the Israeli state ever going to be dismantled? Do you think that’s realistic coming up, ever, in the next 20 years?
Mouin Rabbani
Again, I’m posing a question, and the question is, regardless of what’s feasible or realistic today, the question I’m posing is, can you have peace in the Middle East with this militant, irrational, genocidal, apartheid state and power?
Again, I’m posing a question, and the question is, regardless of what’s feasible or realistic today, the question I’m posing is, can you have peace in the Middle East with this militant, irrational, genocidal, apartheid state and power?
Steven Bonnell
[inaudible 04:27:49] I don’t think so, no.
[inaudible 04:27:49] I don’t think so, no.
Mouin Rabbani
Okay. And the question I’m asking is, can you have peace with this regime or does this regime and its institutions need to be dismantled, similar to the examples I gave of Europe and Southern Africa?
Okay. And the question I’m asking is, can you have peace with this regime or does this regime and its institutions need to be dismantled, similar to the examples I gave of Europe and Southern Africa?
Steven Bonnell
How do you contend with the fact that most of the surrounding Arab states seem to agree that you can?
How do you contend with the fact that most of the surrounding Arab states seem to agree that you can?
Mouin Rabbani
Yeah, you’re correct. Several of them, most importantly, Egypt, Jordan, have made their peace with Israel. I should add that Israel’s conduct since then has placed these relations under strain. I had very little… I didn’t take the reports of a Saudi-Israeli rapprochement particularly seriously before October 7th, the reason being that it was really a Saudi-Israeli-US deal, which committed the US to make certain commitments to Saudi Arabia that would probably never get through Congress.
Yeah, you’re correct. Several of them, most importantly, Egypt, Jordan, have made their peace with Israel. I should add that Israel’s conduct since then has placed these relations under strain. I had very little… I didn’t take the reports of a Saudi-Israeli rapprochement particularly seriously before October 7th, the reason being that it was really a Saudi-Israeli-US deal, which committed the US to make certain commitments to Saudi Arabia that would probably never get through Congress.
Steven Bonnell
Do you not consider the Egypt-Israeli peace deal legitimate then since the United States made a great financial contribution to Egypt?
Do you not consider the Egypt-Israeli peace deal legitimate then since the United States made a great financial contribution to Egypt?
Mouin Rabbani
I don’t think the question is whether that deal is legitimate or not. I think that deal exists. But the point is, the core of this conflict is not between Israel and Egypt. The core of this conflict is between Israel and the Palestinian people.
I don’t think the question is whether that deal is legitimate or not. I think that deal exists. But the point is, the core of this conflict is not between Israel and Egypt. The core of this conflict is between Israel and the Palestinian people.
And the reason that Israel agreed to relinquish the occupied Egyptian Sinai and the reason that Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty was signed in 1979 is because Israel, in 1973, recognized that its military superiority was ultimately no match for Egypt’s determination to recover its occupied territories and that there would come a point when Egypt would find a way to extract an unbearable price.
Benny Morris
Maybe just Israelis wanted peace.
Maybe just Israelis wanted peace.
Mouin Rabbani
Well, the Israelis wanted-
Well, the Israelis wanted-
Benny Morris
Not just because they were afraid of what Egypt might do at some point.
Not just because they were afraid of what Egypt might do at some point.
Mouin Rabbani
If you’re talking about the average Israeli citizen, I think that’s a fair characterization. If you’re talking about the Israeli leadership, I think they looked at it in more strategic terms of how do you remove-
If you’re talking about the average Israeli citizen, I think that’s a fair characterization. If you’re talking about the Israeli leadership, I think they looked at it in more strategic terms of how do you remove-
Benny Morris
I think it’s both.
I think it’s both.
Mouin Rabbani
… the most powerful Arab military states from the equation?
… the most powerful Arab military states from the equation?
Norman Finkelstein
Two points. Simple points. What was the terms of that Egypt-Israel peace treaty? International law, Egypt demanded every-
Two points. Simple points. What was the terms of that Egypt-Israel peace treaty? International law, Egypt demanded every-
Benny Morris
Nobody cared about international law.
Nobody cared about international law.
Norman Finkelstein
Allow me to finish. Every single inch of Egyptian-
Allow me to finish. Every single inch of Egyptian-
Benny Morris
Nobody [inaudible 04:30:30] about international law.
Nobody [inaudible 04:30:30] about international law.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay.
Okay.
Benny Morris
Begin and Carter and Sadat talk about the realities-
Begin and Carter and Sadat talk about the realities-
Norman Finkelstein
No, Professor-
No, Professor-
Benny Morris
… of Israel occupying territory and wanting peace.
… of Israel occupying territory and wanting peace.
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris, I know the record. They demanded, as you know because you’ve written about it, they demanded every square inch, as you know. They demanded the oil fields be dismantled, the airfields be dismantled.
Professor Morris, I know the record. They demanded, as you know because you’ve written about it, they demanded every square inch, as you know. They demanded the oil fields be dismantled, the airfields be dismantled.
Benny Morris
No, not dismantle. They wanted the oil fields.
No, not dismantle. They wanted the oil fields.
Norman Finkelstein
And they wanted the settlements dismantled.
And they wanted the settlements dismantled.
Benny Morris
They wanted the settlements dismantled.
They wanted the settlements dismantled.
Norman Finkelstein
The settlements, the oil fields, and the airfield, they demanded all three back. You can’t have-
The settlements, the oil fields, and the airfield, they demanded all three back. You can’t have-
Benny Morris
What do you mean “back”? The airfields weren’t there when the Egyptians were there.
What do you mean “back”? The airfields weren’t there when the Egyptians were there.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. That’s incorrect.
Okay. That’s incorrect.
Benny Morris
What’s incorrect?
What’s incorrect?
Norman Finkelstein
You’re incorrect.
You’re incorrect.
Benny Morris
The airfields were built after-
The airfields were built after-
Norman Finkelstein
They built an airfield. The Israelis built an airfield in the occupied Sinai.
They built an airfield. The Israelis built an airfield in the occupied Sinai.
Benny Morris
Yes.
Yes.
Norman Finkelstein
And they wanted it back.
And they wanted it back.
Benny Morris
They didn’t want it back. It wasn’t theirs.
They didn’t want it back. It wasn’t theirs.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay.
Okay.
Benny Morris
They wanted the territory in which the airfields were built back.
They wanted the territory in which the airfields were built back.
Norman Finkelstein
The oil fields, the airfields, the settlements had to be dismantled.
The oil fields, the airfields, the settlements had to be dismantled.
Benny Morris
Yes.
Yes.
Norman Finkelstein
Begin said, “I don’t want to be the first prime minister to dismantle a settlement.”
Begin said, “I don’t want to be the first prime minister to dismantle a settlement.”
Benny Morris
But he did.
But he did.
Norman Finkelstein
But he did. Why? Because of the law.
But he did. Why? Because of the law.
Benny Morris
No.
No.
Steven Bonnell
No. It was because of peace… It was normalization-
No. It was because of peace… It was normalization-
Benny Morris
Nobody cared about the law. The law had nothing to do with anything. It was a negotiation between two states-
Nobody cared about the law. The law had nothing to do with anything. It was a negotiation between two states-
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Morris. Mr. Morris.
Mr. Morris. Mr. Morris.
Benny Morris
… each of which wanted certain things.
… each of which wanted certain things.
Norman Finkelstein
Palestinians [inaudible 04:31:42]-
Palestinians [inaudible 04:31:42]-
Benny Morris
The law had nothing to do with anything.
The law had nothing to do with anything.
Norman Finkelstein
… as they said repeatedly in the negotiations-
… as they said repeatedly in the negotiations-
Benny Morris
You’re not listening. You’re not listening.
You’re not listening. You’re not listening.
Norman Finkelstein
I know-
I know-
Benny Morris
You’re missing the whole point.
You’re missing the whole point.
Norman Finkelstein
I’ve read the negotiations.
I’ve read the negotiations.
Benny Morris
The law has nothing to do with anything.
The law has nothing to do with anything.
Norman Finkelstein
There were two foreign relations of US volumes on it.
There were two foreign relations of US volumes on it.
Benny Morris
Nobody cared about the law.
Nobody cared about the law.
Norman Finkelstein
The Palestinians kept saying, “We want exactly-“
The Palestinians kept saying, “We want exactly-“
Benny Morris
Forget the Palestinians. They weren’t there.
Forget the Palestinians. They weren’t there.
Norman Finkelstein
Allow me to finish. The Palestinians kept saying, “We want what Egypt got.”
Allow me to finish. The Palestinians kept saying, “We want what Egypt got.”
Norman Finkelstein
The Palestinians kept saying, “We want what Egypt got. We want what Egypt got.” Egypt got everything back.
The Palestinians kept saying, “We want what Egypt got. We want what Egypt got.” Egypt got everything back.
Benny Morris
But nothing to do with the law.
But nothing to do with the law.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay.
Okay.
Benny Morris
Nothing to do with the law.
Nothing to do with the law.
Norman Finkelstein
And number two, I’m not saying it’s the whole picture, but as Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan said at the time, he said, “If a car has four wheels and you remove one wheel, the car can’t move.” And for them, removing Egypt from the Arab front would then remove any Arab military threat to Israel.
And number two, I’m not saying it’s the whole picture, but as Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan said at the time, he said, “If a car has four wheels and you remove one wheel, the car can’t move.” And for them, removing Egypt from the Arab front would then remove any Arab military threat to Israel.
Benny Morris
Yeah, but it’s got nothing to do with the international law.
Yeah, but it’s got nothing to do with the international law.
Norman Finkelstein
No, the first part did, and that’s what the Palestinians kept saying-
No, the first part did, and that’s what the Palestinians kept saying-
Benny Morris
I don’t know what the first part is.
I don’t know what the first part is.
Norman Finkelstein
… “We want what each Egypt got from the settlement.”
… “We want what each Egypt got from the settlement.”
Benny Morris
Yeah, that’s true, but forget the international law.
Yeah, that’s true, but forget the international law.
Norman Finkelstein
By the way-
By the way-
Benny Morris
It had nothing to do with negotiations.
It had nothing to do with negotiations.
Norman Finkelstein
… one last thing on a personal note. The quote about Sharm El Sheikh without peace, that’s the only thing you ever cited from a book of mine.
… one last thing on a personal note. The quote about Sharm El Sheikh without peace, that’s the only thing you ever cited from a book of mine.
Benny Morris
I’ve cited from your book?
I’ve cited from your book?
Norman Finkelstein
Yes. I was absolutely shocked at your betrayal of your people. That was pure treason.I
Yes. I was absolutely shocked at your betrayal of your people. That was pure treason.I
Benny Morris
I apologize for that. I apologize.
I apologize for that. I apologize.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, I accept.
Okay, I accept.
Hope for the future
Lex Fridman
All right. Well, let me try once again, for the region and for the entirety of humanity, what gives you hope? We just heard a lot of pessimistic, cynical takes. What gives you hope?
All right. Well, let me try once again, for the region and for the entirety of humanity, what gives you hope? We just heard a lot of pessimistic, cynical takes. What gives you hope?
Benny Morris
People don’t like war. That’s a good reason, that’s hope. In other words, the fear of war, the disaster of war, should give people an impetus to try and seek peace.
People don’t like war. That’s a good reason, that’s hope. In other words, the fear of war, the disaster of war, should give people an impetus to try and seek peace.
Lex Fridman
When you look at people in Gaza and people on the West Bank, people in Israel, fundamentally they hate war?
When you look at people in Gaza and people on the West Bank, people in Israel, fundamentally they hate war?
Benny Morris
Yes, I think so.
Yes, I think so.
Lex Fridman
What gives you hope?
What gives you hope?
Norman Finkelstein
There is no hope, no. It’s an extreme… Hey, I’m not happy to say that.
There is no hope, no. It’s an extreme… Hey, I’m not happy to say that.
Steven Bonnell
Of course you are.
Of course you are.
Norman Finkelstein
It’s a very bleak moment right now.
It’s a very bleak moment right now.
Benny Morris
That I agree with. I agree with that.
That I agree with. I agree with that.
Norman Finkelstein
Because Israel believes it has to restore what it calls its deterrence capability. I think you’ve written about it actually, I just realized. Israel has to restore its deterrence capability, and after the catastrophe of October 7th, restoring its deterrence capacity means… this part you didn’t write about… the annihilation of Gaza and then moving on to the Hezbollah.
Because Israel believes it has to restore what it calls its deterrence capability. I think you’ve written about it actually, I just realized. Israel has to restore its deterrence capability, and after the catastrophe of October 7th, restoring its deterrence capacity means… this part you didn’t write about… the annihilation of Gaza and then moving on to the Hezbollah.
So the Israelis are dead set on restoring that deterrence capability. On the Arab side, and I know Mouin and I have disagreed on it, and we’re allowed to disagree, I think the Arab side, the lesson they learned from October 7th is Israelis aren’t as strong as we thought they were.
Benny Morris
That would be an unfortunate message if that’s really what the Arabs come to believe.
That would be an unfortunate message if that’s really what the Arabs come to believe.
Norman Finkelstein
And they think that there is a military option now. I think that it’s a zero-sum game at this point, and it’s very, very bleak, and I’m not going to lie about that. Now, I will admit my predictive capacities are not perfect-
And they think that there is a military option now. I think that it’s a zero-sum game at this point, and it’s very, very bleak, and I’m not going to lie about that. Now, I will admit my predictive capacities are not perfect-
Benny Morris
Are limited.
Are limited.
Norman Finkelstein
… are limited, but for the moment it’s a very bleak situation-
… are limited, but for the moment it’s a very bleak situation-
Benny Morris
That I agree with.
That I agree with.
Norman Finkelstein
… and I don’t see right now a way out. However, at the very minimum, permanent ceasefire ended in human and illegal blockade of Gaza, and free the hostages.
… and I don’t see right now a way out. However, at the very minimum, permanent ceasefire ended in human and illegal blockade of Gaza, and free the hostages.
Benny Morris
Why is it illegal? They were shooting rockets at Israel for 20 years. Why is that illegal to blockade Gaza?
Why is it illegal? They were shooting rockets at Israel for 20 years. Why is that illegal to blockade Gaza?
Steven Bonnell
He thinks they’re bottle rockets, that’s what he calls them [inaudible 04:35:47].
He thinks they’re bottle rockets, that’s what he calls them [inaudible 04:35:47].
Norman Finkelstein
Why is it illegal? I’ll tell you why.
Why is it illegal? I’ll tell you why.
Benny Morris
You don’t rocket your neighbor. You rocket your neighbor, expect consequences.
You don’t rocket your neighbor. You rocket your neighbor, expect consequences.
Norman Finkelstein
I’ll tell you why.
I’ll tell you why.
Benny Morris
Expect consequences.
Expect consequences.
Mouin Rabbani
But that works both ways.
But that works both ways.
Norman Finkelstein
Yes.
Yes.
Benny Morris
I know, and I accept that, it works both ways.
I know, and I accept that, it works both ways.
Norman Finkelstein
Professor Morris. I’ll tell you why. Because every human rights, humanitarian and UN organization in the world-
Professor Morris. I’ll tell you why. Because every human rights, humanitarian and UN organization in the world-
Benny Morris
They’re all irrelevant.
They’re all irrelevant.
Norman Finkelstein
… has said that the blockade-
… has said that the blockade-
Benny Morris
You keep quoting them. Nobody cares about Amnesty.
You keep quoting them. Nobody cares about Amnesty.
Norman Finkelstein
… is a form of collective punishment-
… is a form of collective punishment-
Benny Morris
Nobody cares about Amnesty.
Nobody cares about Amnesty.
Norman Finkelstein
… which is illegal under international law.
… which is illegal under international law.
Benny Morris
Forget illegal. The word illegal is…
Forget illegal. The word illegal is…
Norman Finkelstein
You think a blockade which-
You think a blockade which-
Benny Morris
You don’t understand the way the world works. These things are irrelevant.
You don’t understand the way the world works. These things are irrelevant.
Norman Finkelstein
And you think confining, because that’s the blockade-
And you think confining, because that’s the blockade-
Benny Morris
Yes, you don’t shoot rockets at your neighbor.
Yes, you don’t shoot rockets at your neighbor.
Norman Finkelstein
… confining a million children-
… confining a million children-
Benny Morris
That’s the choice of Hamas.
That’s the choice of Hamas.
Steven Bonnell
Children?
Children?
Benny Morris
That’s Hamas’ choice.
That’s Hamas’ choice.
Norman Finkelstein
Confining a million children in what The Economist calls a human rubbish heap-
Confining a million children in what The Economist calls a human rubbish heap-
Benny Morris
The Economist supported Israel in this war, and continues to support Israel.
The Economist supported Israel in this war, and continues to support Israel.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay. What International Committee of The Red Cross called a sinking ship, what the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights called a toxic slum, you think-
Okay. What International Committee of The Red Cross called a sinking ship, what the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights called a toxic slum, you think-
Benny Morris
It is a slum, of course it’s a slum, but it’s caused by the Hamas.
It is a slum, of course it’s a slum, but it’s caused by the Hamas.
Norman Finkelstein
… under international law, you think it’s legitimate-
… under international law, you think it’s legitimate-
Benny Morris
Forget the law.
Forget the law.
Norman Finkelstein
Hey, I know you want to forget the law.
Hey, I know you want to forget the law.
Benny Morris
What about morality? Forget the law, what about morality?
What about morality? Forget the law, what about morality?
Norman Finkelstein
It’s what every Israeli fears the most.
It’s what every Israeli fears the most.
Benny Morris
What?
What?
Norman Finkelstein
The law.
The law.
Benny Morris
No, no, no.
No, no, no.
Norman Finkelstein
As Tzipi Livni said, “I studied international law. I oppose international law.” Of course you don’t want to hear about the law.
As Tzipi Livni said, “I studied international law. I oppose international law.” Of course you don’t want to hear about the law.
Benny Morris
That has got nothing to do with anything.
That has got nothing to do with anything.
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, so here’s the thing. Then don’t complain about October 7th.
Okay, so here’s the thing. Then don’t complain about October 7th.
Benny Morris
Do you hear me complaining? I didn’t complain.
Do you hear me complaining? I didn’t complain.
Norman Finkelstein
If you want to say forget about the law-
If you want to say forget about the law-
Benny Morris
All I said was they acted like barbarians.
All I said was they acted like barbarians.
Norman Finkelstein
… when there is no international humanitarian law, there’s no distinction between civilians and combatants-
… when there is no international humanitarian law, there’s no distinction between civilians and combatants-
Benny Morris
There should be, but it’s got nothing to do with the law.
There should be, but it’s got nothing to do with the law.
Norman Finkelstein
Now you’re doing what Mouin said, you’re becoming very selective about the law. If you want to forget about the law-
Now you’re doing what Mouin said, you’re becoming very selective about the law. If you want to forget about the law-
Benny Morris
People should be [inaudible 04:37:51].
People should be [inaudible 04:37:51].
Mouin Rabbani
Across the board.
Across the board.
Norman Finkelstein
… Hamas had every right to do what it did. It had every right to do what it did according to you, not to me, because you want to forget the law.
… Hamas had every right to do what it did. It had every right to do what it did according to you, not to me, because you want to forget the law.
Steven Bonnell
Do you still support the Houthis shooting random ships?
Do you still support the Houthis shooting random ships?
Norman Finkelstein
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Steven Bonnell
Okay, that’s a violation of international law, so you play the same game.
Okay, that’s a violation of international law, so you play the same game.
Norman Finkelstein
Absolutely. And were there are power during World War II who had the courage of the Houthis, were there are power that had that kind of courage-
Absolutely. And were there are power during World War II who had the courage of the Houthis, were there are power that had that kind of courage-
Steven Bonnell
So courageous to be bombing merchant ships while tens of thousands of people die of actual starvation, not the starvation that exists in the Gaza Strip where people before October 7th don’t die of starvation. Not the concentration camp, as they say of the Gaza Strip. The Houthis.
So courageous to be bombing merchant ships while tens of thousands of people die of actual starvation, not the starvation that exists in the Gaza Strip where people before October 7th don’t die of starvation. Not the concentration camp, as they say of the Gaza Strip. The Houthis.
Benny Morris
What about starvation in Yemen? Don’t that have something better to do?
What about starvation in Yemen? Don’t that have something better to do?
Norman Finkelstein
That was the Houthis.
That was the Houthis.
Benny Morris
Yes, I know. Don’t they have anything better to do?
Yes, I know. Don’t they have anything better to do?
Norman Finkelstein
That was the Houthis, and you know in three years they blew up 180,000 people.
That was the Houthis, and you know in three years they blew up 180,000 people.
Benny Morris
Shouldn’t they be feeding the Yemenis?
Shouldn’t they be feeding the Yemenis?
Norman Finkelstein
You know, 60,000 Yemenis died in starvation?
You know, 60,000 Yemenis died in starvation?
Benny Morris
Why fight the western powers in Israel when you should be taking care of your problems at home, the Houthis.
Why fight the western powers in Israel when you should be taking care of your problems at home, the Houthis.
Mouin Rabbani
Often the only allies of the dispossessed are those who experience similar circumstances.
Often the only allies of the dispossessed are those who experience similar circumstances.
Benny Morris
Don’t you think that they should take care of the Yemeni problems?
Don’t you think that they should take care of the Yemeni problems?
Mouin Rabbani
As I said-
As I said-
Norman Finkelstein
I’m very happy they’re helping out the Palestinians.
I’m very happy they’re helping out the Palestinians.
Benny Morris
It’s at the expense of the Yemenis. They’ll pay for it.
It’s at the expense of the Yemenis. They’ll pay for it.
Norman Finkelstein
Anybody who comes to the aid of those suffering the genocide-
Anybody who comes to the aid of those suffering the genocide-
Benny Morris
There’s no genocide.
There’s no genocide.
Norman Finkelstein
… half of whom are children… Yeah, according to the most current UN reports, as of today-
… half of whom are children… Yeah, according to the most current UN reports, as of today-
Benny Morris
There’s no genocide.
There’s no genocide.
Norman Finkelstein
… one quarter of the population of Gaza-
… one quarter of the population of Gaza-
Benny Morris
Is starving.
Is starving.
Norman Finkelstein
That means 500,000 children-
That means 500,000 children-
Benny Morris
Are starving,
Are starving,
Norman Finkelstein
… are on the verge of famine.
… are on the verge of famine.
Benny Morris
They keep saying on the verge of.
They keep saying on the verge of.
Steven Bonnell
On the verge of. Didn’t you quote that they said it was unlivable?
On the verge of. Didn’t you quote that they said it was unlivable?
Benny Morris
I have not seen one Palestinian die of starvation in these last four months. Not one.
I have not seen one Palestinian die of starvation in these last four months. Not one.
Mouin Rabbani
There have been documented cases.
There have been documented cases.
Benny Morris
They are always on the verge. They’re on the verge.
They are always on the verge. They’re on the verge.
Mouin Rabbani
There have been documented cases.
There have been documented cases.
Benny Morris
I haven’t seen any.
I haven’t seen any.
Steven Bonnell
Yesterday Al Jazeera said six, and the day before that they said two, so those are the two.
Yesterday Al Jazeera said six, and the day before that they said two, so those are the two.
Benny Morris
That number probably dies in Israel of starvation also.
That number probably dies in Israel of starvation also.
Mouin Rabbani
I don’t think there’s famine in Israel.
I don’t think there’s famine in Israel.
Norman Finkelstein
You’re so laid back, so blasé.
You’re so laid back, so blasé.
Benny Morris
There isn’t. There isn’t in the Gaza Strip either. It’s something which is produced for the Western-
There isn’t. There isn’t in the Gaza Strip either. It’s something which is produced for the Western-
Norman Finkelstein
“I haven’t seen any starving children yet.”
“I haven’t seen any starving children yet.”
Mouin Rabbani
There are infants dying due to a engineered lack of access to food and nutrition.
There are infants dying due to a engineered lack of access to food and nutrition.
Benny Morris
I don’t think it’s engineered, I think that if the Hamas stopped shooting perhaps, or-
I don’t think it’s engineered, I think that if the Hamas stopped shooting perhaps, or-
Norman Finkelstein
Unfortunately, most-
Unfortunately, most-
Mouin Rabbani
As I said, engineered.
As I said, engineered.
Norman Finkelstein
I think Human Rights Watch called it using starvation as a weapon. That’s called engineering.
I think Human Rights Watch called it using starvation as a weapon. That’s called engineering.
Steven Bonnell
That’s what they did, but you were pushed on this by Coleman Hughes to bring up an example of why is the Gaza Strip, by what metric are they starving? By what metric is it so behind the rest of the world?
That’s what they did, but you were pushed on this by Coleman Hughes to bring up an example of why is the Gaza Strip, by what metric are they starving? By what metric is it so behind the rest of the world?
Mouin Rabbani
If we’re going to bring up-
If we’re going to bring up-
Steven Bonnell
I want to hear an answer to that, because he didn’t answer it before.
I want to hear an answer to that, because he didn’t answer it before.
Norman Finkelstein
I’m happy to answer it. I just quoted you from the humanitarian organizations. They said one quarter of the population of Gaza is now verging on famine.
I’m happy to answer it. I just quoted you from the humanitarian organizations. They said one quarter of the population of Gaza is now verging on famine.
Steven Bonnell
Before October 7th.
Before October 7th.
Norman Finkelstein
I’m not going before October 7th.
I’m not going before October 7th.
Steven Bonnell
But you used that as justification for Hamas fighting. You said the conditions were unlivable, they had to fight.
But you used that as justification for Hamas fighting. You said the conditions were unlivable, they had to fight.
Norman Finkelstein
I said to him-
I said to him-
Steven Bonnell
So my question is what made it unlivable prior to October 7th? What are the metrics that you’re using?
So my question is what made it unlivable prior to October 7th? What are the metrics that you’re using?
Norman Finkelstein
There were about five, six or seven reports issued by UNCTAD, issued by the World Bank, issued by the International Monetary Fund, and they all said that’s why.
There were about five, six or seven reports issued by UNCTAD, issued by the World Bank, issued by the International Monetary Fund, and they all said that’s why.
Steven Bonnell
Why? Why did they say that?
Why? Why did they say that?
Norman Finkelstein
That’s why The Economist, not a radical periodical, described Gaza as a human rubbish heap.
That’s why The Economist, not a radical periodical, described Gaza as a human rubbish heap.
Steven Bonnell
So tell me by what metrics? If you’re a historian, if you do all this work to get to things, tell me what they said. Don’t just tell me a sentence, tell me by what metric.
So tell me by what metrics? If you’re a historian, if you do all this work to get to things, tell me what they said. Don’t just tell me a sentence, tell me by what metric.
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Bonnell.
Mr. Bonnell.
Steven Bonnell
He’s not going to answer again.
He’s not going to answer again.
Norman Finkelstein
I don’t think I’ve avoided any of your questions-
I don’t think I’ve avoided any of your questions-
Steven Bonnell
Of course you have, you’ve avoided every question.
Of course you have, you’ve avoided every question.
Norman Finkelstein
… except when they breached the threshold of complete imbecility.
… except when they breached the threshold of complete imbecility.
Steven Bonnell
So you were about to tell me by what metric the Gaza Strip is a humanitarian crisis.
So you were about to tell me by what metric the Gaza Strip is a humanitarian crisis.
Norman Finkelstein
I’m going to answer you. You remember what I said a moment ago, I said to Professor Morris, I defer to expertise? I look at what the organizations say. I look at what the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights said.
I’m going to answer you. You remember what I said a moment ago, I said to Professor Morris, I defer to expertise? I look at what the organizations say. I look at what the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights said.
Steven Bonnell
You’re saying in more words that you don’t know. You don’t know or you don’t care.
You’re saying in more words that you don’t know. You don’t know or you don’t care.
Norman Finkelstein
And I don’t know.
And I don’t know.
Steven Bonnell
Okay, that’s fine. That’s what I said.
Okay, that’s fine. That’s what I said.
Norman Finkelstein
Have you ever investigated how complicated is the metric for hunger, starvation, and famine? It is such a complicated metric they figured out, if you asked me to repeat it now, I couldn’t do it.
Have you ever investigated how complicated is the metric for hunger, starvation, and famine? It is such a complicated metric they figured out, if you asked me to repeat it now, I couldn’t do it.
Steven Bonnell
And yet we have a Human Development Index where we rank countries, yet we can still measure infant mortality-
And yet we have a Human Development Index where we rank countries, yet we can still measure infant mortality-
Norman Finkelstein
Okay, you go and call the news programs.
Okay, you go and call the news programs.
Steven Bonnell
… life expectancy, we can measure all of these things.
… life expectancy, we can measure all of these things.
Lex Fridman
Mouin, I’m holding out for you here. You still didn’t answer the hope question. What gives you a source of hope about the region?
Mouin, I’m holding out for you here. You still didn’t answer the hope question. What gives you a source of hope about the region?
Mouin Rabbani
Well, first of all, I would agree with Benny Morris and Norman Finkelstein that the current situation is bleak, and I think it would be unreasonable to expect it to not get even bleaker in the coming weeks and months. And we now, this conflict, really, it originated in the late 19th century, it’s been a more or less active conflict since the 1920s, 1930s, and it has produced a tremendous amount of suffering, and regional conflict, and geopolitical complications, and all of that. But what gives me hope is that throughout their entire ordeal, the Palestinian people have never surrendered, and I believe they never will surrender to overwhelming force and violence. They have taken everything that Israel has thrown at them, they have taken everything that the West has thrown at them, they have taken everything that those who are supposed to be their natural allies have on occasion thrown at them.
Well, first of all, I would agree with Benny Morris and Norman Finkelstein that the current situation is bleak, and I think it would be unreasonable to expect it to not get even bleaker in the coming weeks and months. And we now, this conflict, really, it originated in the late 19th century, it’s been a more or less active conflict since the 1920s, 1930s, and it has produced a tremendous amount of suffering, and regional conflict, and geopolitical complications, and all of that. But what gives me hope is that throughout their entire ordeal, the Palestinian people have never surrendered, and I believe they never will surrender to overwhelming force and violence. They have taken everything that Israel has thrown at them, they have taken everything that the West has thrown at them, they have taken everything that those who are supposed to be their natural allies have on occasion thrown at them.
But this is a people that never has and, I believe, never will surrender. At a certain point, I think Israel and its leaders will have to come to the realization that by hook or by crook, these people are going to achieve their inalienable and legitimate national rights, and that is going to be a reality.
Benny Morris
Well, what do you mean by that? You mean all of Palestine? Is that what you mean?
Well, what do you mean by that? You mean all of Palestine? Is that what you mean?
Mouin Rabbani
No.
No.
Benny Morris
From the river to the sea?
From the river to the sea?
Mouin Rabbani
Well, ideally, of course, yes. And what I was….
Well, ideally, of course, yes. And what I was….
Benny Morris
Are those the inalienable rights?
Are those the inalienable rights?
Mouin Rabbani
No. What I was saying earlier, and then the discussion got sidetracked, is that I did believe that a two-state settlement, a partition of Palestine along the 1967 boundaries would have been a reasonable solution, because I think it also would have opened pathways to further-
No. What I was saying earlier, and then the discussion got sidetracked, is that I did believe that a two-state settlement, a partition of Palestine along the 1967 boundaries would have been a reasonable solution, because I think it also would have opened pathways to further-
Benny Morris
But now you believe what?
But now you believe what?
Mouin Rabbani
… further nonviolent engagement between Israel and the Palestinians that could create other forms of coexistence in a federal, or binational, or other-
… further nonviolent engagement between Israel and the Palestinians that could create other forms of coexistence in a federal, or binational, or other-
Steven Bonnell
What do you think about refugees in regards to that? Do you think there has to be a resettlement of the five or six million, whoever wants to lay claim to be [inaudible 04:45:12]?
What do you think about refugees in regards to that? Do you think there has to be a resettlement of the five or six million, whoever wants to lay claim to be [inaudible 04:45:12]?
Benny Morris
A return?
A return?
Mouin Rabbani
I think there has to be an explicit acknowledgement of…
I think there has to be an explicit acknowledgement of…
Benny Morris
Responsibility?
Responsibility?
Mouin Rabbani
… of the responsibility-
… of the responsibility-
Benny Morris
And the return?
And the return?
Mouin Rabbani
… and of their rights. I think that in the framework of a two-state settlement, I think a formula would need to be found that does not undermine the foundations of a two-state settlement. And I don’t think it would be that difficult, because I suspect that there are probably large numbers of Palestinian refugees who, once their rights are acknowledged, will find it exceptionally distasteful-
… and of their rights. I think that in the framework of a two-state settlement, I think a formula would need to be found that does not undermine the foundations of a two-state settlement. And I don’t think it would be that difficult, because I suspect that there are probably large numbers of Palestinian refugees who, once their rights are acknowledged, will find it exceptionally distasteful-
Benny Morris
To return from [inaudible 04:46:00].
To return from [inaudible 04:46:00].
Mouin Rabbani
… to have to live among the kind of sentiments that we’ve heard around this table today, to be quite frank. I mean, I was previously unfamiliar with you, and I watched one of your preparation videos. Very disconcerting stuff, I have to say. You were explaining two days ago, in the discussion about apartheid and how absurd it was, that in your view Jim Crow was not apartheid, but Arab states not giving citizenship to Palestinian refugees is apartheid. That’s what I meant with my earlier comments about white supremacy.
… to have to live among the kind of sentiments that we’ve heard around this table today, to be quite frank. I mean, I was previously unfamiliar with you, and I watched one of your preparation videos. Very disconcerting stuff, I have to say. You were explaining two days ago, in the discussion about apartheid and how absurd it was, that in your view Jim Crow was not apartheid, but Arab states not giving citizenship to Palestinian refugees is apartheid. That’s what I meant with my earlier comments about white supremacy.
Steven Bonnell
That’s great, the white supremacy comment. Well, hold on, let me respond. My issue is that I feel like we have jumped on this euphemistic treadmill, and I think that’s part of the reason why this conflict will never get solved, is because on one end you’ve got a people who are now convinced internationally that they’re victims of apartheid, genocide, concentration camp conditions, ethnic cleansing, they’re forced to live in an open air prison, with all of these things that are stacked against them, all of these terms that are highly specific, that refer to very precise things. And then when people like you say that they should-
That’s great, the white supremacy comment. Well, hold on, let me respond. My issue is that I feel like we have jumped on this euphemistic treadmill, and I think that’s part of the reason why this conflict will never get solved, is because on one end you’ve got a people who are now convinced internationally that they’re victims of apartheid, genocide, concentration camp conditions, ethnic cleansing, they’re forced to live in an open air prison, with all of these things that are stacked against them, all of these terms that are highly specific, that refer to very precise things. And then when people like you say that they should-
Mouin Rabbani
Well, I would expect nothing less from someone who doesn’t think Jim Crow is apartheid, but who does think that Arab states not giving Palestinians-
Well, I would expect nothing less from someone who doesn’t think Jim Crow is apartheid, but who does think that Arab states not giving Palestinians-
Steven Bonnell
The problem is you’re morally loading. For you apartheid is when racists do bad things.
The problem is you’re morally loading. For you apartheid is when racists do bad things.
Mouin Rabbani
No. There’s a definition of apartheid.
No. There’s a definition of apartheid.
Steven Bonnell
That’s great.
That’s great.
Mouin Rabbani
There is a very clear definition of apartheid.
There is a very clear definition of apartheid.
Steven Bonnell
A specific top-down racial domination, enacted through top-down, like federal legislative policies or whatever, means that I don’t know if Jim Crow would have qualified for apartheid. That doesn’t make it any less…
A specific top-down racial domination, enacted through top-down, like federal legislative policies or whatever, means that I don’t know if Jim Crow would have qualified for apartheid. That doesn’t make it any less…
Norman Finkelstein
Have you ever heard of Plessy versus Ferguson?
Have you ever heard of Plessy versus Ferguson?
Steven Bonnell
Excuse me. Finkelstein, I’m talking right now. Excuse me, excuse me Twinklestein, I’m talking to your friend over here. I don’t know if it would have qualified as the crime of apartheid, just like if Israel were to literally nuke the Gaza Strip and kill two million people, I don’t know if that would qualify for the crime of genocide.
Excuse me. Finkelstein, I’m talking right now. Excuse me, excuse me Twinklestein, I’m talking to your friend over here. I don’t know if it would have qualified as the crime of apartheid, just like if Israel were to literally nuke the Gaza Strip and kill two million people, I don’t know if that would qualify for the crime of genocide.
Mouin Rabbani
In your eyes probably not.
In your eyes probably not.
Steven Bonnell
Well, yeah, but because genocide requires a special intent. I think the issue is, instead of… And I think this conversation actually is emblematic of the entire conversation.
Well, yeah, but because genocide requires a special intent. I think the issue is, instead of… And I think this conversation actually is emblematic of the entire conversation.
Mouin Rabbani
Then let me finish answering Benny Morris’s question.
Then let me finish answering Benny Morris’s question.
Steven Bonnell
Well sure, but you accused me of supporting racism.
Well sure, but you accused me of supporting racism.
Mouin Rabbani
Well, you did.
Well, you did.
Steven Bonnell
I didn’t.
I didn’t.
Mouin Rabbani
And you are.
And you are.
Steven Bonnell
Do you think I support Jim Crow laws?
Do you think I support Jim Crow laws?
Mouin Rabbani
Look, when-
Look, when-
Steven Bonnell
The fact that you can’t even answer that honestly, right?
The fact that you can’t even answer that honestly, right?
Mouin Rabbani
It doesn’t matter what-
It doesn’t matter what-
Steven Bonnell
You couldn’t say that 800 civilians were killed by Hamas, you said, “Well, maybe 400 were killed by Israel. I don’t know the number, maybe-
You couldn’t say that 800 civilians were killed by Hamas, you said, “Well, maybe 400 were killed by Israel. I don’t know the number, maybe-
Mouin Rabbani
No, I didn’t say that.
No, I didn’t say that.
Steven Bonnell
You said 400.
You said 400.
Mouin Rabbani
No, I didn’t say that.
No, I didn’t say that.
Steven Bonnell
You co-signed the opinion.
You co-signed the opinion.
Mouin Rabbani
No, I didn’t.
No, I didn’t.
Norman Finkelstein
No, he didn’t. He said the majority [inaudible 04:48:20].
No, he didn’t. He said the majority [inaudible 04:48:20].
Steven Bonnell
Well, wait, how many? I think the word was some, that’s what I heard.
Well, wait, how many? I think the word was some, that’s what I heard.
Norman Finkelstein
No, I think your memory-
No, I think your memory-
Mouin Rabbani
Well, you weren’t listening.
Well, you weren’t listening.
Norman Finkelstein
… you memory’s retarded.
… you memory’s retarded.
Steven Bonnell
How many people do you think approximately, if you had to ballpark it, how many do you think were killed by Hamas on October 7th?
How many people do you think approximately, if you had to ballpark it, how many do you think were killed by Hamas on October 7th?
Mouin Rabbani
I think it’s pretty clear that the majority of civilians that were killed on-
I think it’s pretty clear that the majority of civilians that were killed on-
Norman Finkelstein
That’s what he said.
That’s what he said.
Steven Bonnell
51%? Or 90%?
51%? Or 90%?
Mouin Rabbani
Don’t ask me to put a number on something I don’t know.
Don’t ask me to put a number on something I don’t know.
Steven Bonnell
I just want a ballpark. Those are two very different intuition.
I just want a ballpark. Those are two very different intuition.
Mouin Rabbani
First of all, when you say Hamas, do you mean Palestinians, or do you mean Hamas specifically?
First of all, when you say Hamas, do you mean Palestinians, or do you mean Hamas specifically?
Steven Bonnell
I mean the invading Palestinian force? I don’t like to say Palestinians, because I don’t think all Palestinian civilians were involved, so I’ll say Hamas, Islamic Jihad, whatever, Al Quds, whatever other-
I mean the invading Palestinian force? I don’t like to say Palestinians, because I don’t think all Palestinian civilians were involved, so I’ll say Hamas, Islamic Jihad, whatever, Al Quds, whatever other-
Mouin Rabbani
But that’s how this discussion started. You said Hamas and I began to answer that, and then Benny Morris said, actually he means Hamas in addition to Jihad and the others.
But that’s how this discussion started. You said Hamas and I began to answer that, and then Benny Morris said, actually he means Hamas in addition to Jihad and the others.
Steven Bonnell
So of the invading Palestinian force, how many do you think killed civilians versus the IDF? What do you think the ballpark, the percentage?
So of the invading Palestinian force, how many do you think killed civilians versus the IDF? What do you think the ballpark, the percentage?
Mouin Rabbani
Well, the figures we have are that about a third of the casualties on October 7th were military, and about two-thirds were-
Well, the figures we have are that about a third of the casualties on October 7th were military, and about two-thirds were-
Steven Bonnell
That’s not what I asked at all.
That’s not what I asked at all.
Mouin Rabbani
What’s your question?
What’s your question?
Benny Morris
He’s asking about the two-thirds.
He’s asking about the two-thirds.
Steven Bonnell
What percentage of civilians do you think were killed by the invading force, a ballpark?
What percentage of civilians do you think were killed by the invading force, a ballpark?
Mouin Rabbani
I think a clear majority, but I can’t give you a specific figure.
I think a clear majority, but I can’t give you a specific figure.
Steven Bonnell
If you thought it was closer to 51% or 99% were killed by-
If you thought it was closer to 51% or 99% were killed by-
Norman Finkelstein
Why would he know that? How would he know that?
Why would he know that? How would he know that?
Steven Bonnell
Because it’s interesting to actually stake out a position.
Because it’s interesting to actually stake out a position.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah, it’s interesting-
Yeah, it’s interesting-
Steven Bonnell
If you want to be completely, totally agnostic on it, that’s fine.
If you want to be completely, totally agnostic on it, that’s fine.
Norman Finkelstein
Based on complete ignorance, because we don’t know. Professor Morris doesn’t know, Mouin Rabbani doesn’t know.
Based on complete ignorance, because we don’t know. Professor Morris doesn’t know, Mouin Rabbani doesn’t know.
Steven Bonnell
And yet you can speak with absolute certainty that the IDF is targeting and murdering Palestinian children intentionally.
And yet you can speak with absolute certainty that the IDF is targeting and murdering Palestinian children intentionally.
Norman Finkelstein
Well, actually-
Well, actually-
Steven Bonnell
Do you see the double standard?
Do you see the double standard?
Norman Finkelstein
No, I don’t. You see-
No, I don’t. You see-
Steven Bonnell
I know you don’t. It was a rhetorical question, obviously you don’t.
I know you don’t. It was a rhetorical question, obviously you don’t.
Norman Finkelstein
You know why?
You know why?
Steven Bonnell
Because you’re uneducated on the matter.
Because you’re uneducated on the matter.
Norman Finkelstein
I looked at the UN report.
I looked at the UN report.
Steven Bonnell
Uh-huh. The Goldstone Report?
Uh-huh. The Goldstone Report?
Norman Finkelstein
No. The UN report on the great march of return in 2018, and they said that the snipers were targeting children, medics, journalists, and disabled people.
No. The UN report on the great march of return in 2018, and they said that the snipers were targeting children, medics, journalists, and disabled people.
Mouin Rabbani
Just as they are now in this conflict.
Just as they are now in this conflict.
Norman Finkelstein
Exactly.
Exactly.
Mouin Rabbani
More journalists have been killed in the last several months in Gaza, than in any other conflict.
More journalists have been killed in the last several months in Gaza, than in any other conflict.
Norman Finkelstein
And in all of World War II.
And in all of World War II.
Steven Bonnell
Do you acknowledge that Hamas… That’s great, the comparison is fun.
Do you acknowledge that Hamas… That’s great, the comparison is fun.
Mouin Rabbani
Hamas is not killing journalists in the Gaza strip.
Hamas is not killing journalists in the Gaza strip.
Steven Bonnell
Do you agree that they operate in civilian uniforms, that their goal is to induce that confusion, that that’s the way that they conduct themselves militarily?
Do you agree that they operate in civilian uniforms, that their goal is to induce that confusion, that that’s the way that they conduct themselves militarily?
Mouin Rabbani
Let me finish my point. More journalists have been, more UN-
Let me finish my point. More journalists have been, more UN-
Steven Bonnell
I understand, and more children, and the-
I understand, and more children, and the-
Norman Finkelstein
He doesn’t want to hear it, it’s so boring.
He doesn’t want to hear it, it’s so boring.
Steven Bonnell
No, because it’s virtue signaling.
No, because it’s virtue signaling.
Norman Finkelstein
Virtue signaling!
Virtue signaling!
Steven Bonnell
You don’t have a material, a substantial… It is virtue signaling. Yes, like when you say children, over and over again, that’s virtue signaling.
You don’t have a material, a substantial… It is virtue signaling. Yes, like when you say children, over and over again, that’s virtue signaling.
Mouin Rabbani
You know you have this habit of mocking the dead.
You know you have this habit of mocking the dead.
Norman Finkelstein
But talking about how many Israelis were killed, that’s not virtue signaling, because that’s human life.
But talking about how many Israelis were killed, that’s not virtue signaling, because that’s human life.
Steven Bonnell
I don’t care if a hundred are killed or a thousand, I’m curious who you’re assigning blame to.
I don’t care if a hundred are killed or a thousand, I’m curious who you’re assigning blame to.
Norman Finkelstein
You just interrogated him, 51%, 90%.
You just interrogated him, 51%, 90%.
Steven Bonnell
The question, yes, that’s not the number, that’s the responsibility, Norman.
The question, yes, that’s not the number, that’s the responsibility, Norman.
Norman Finkelstein
And then Mouin mentions that more journalists were killed in Gaza than in all of World War II.
And then Mouin mentions that more journalists were killed in Gaza than in all of World War II.
Steven Bonnell
That doesn’t further any part of the conversation.
That doesn’t further any part of the conversation.
Norman Finkelstein
And more medics were killed in Gaza.
And more medics were killed in Gaza.
Benny Morris
No, that’s silly.
No, that’s silly.
Norman Finkelstein
And then he says, it’s virtue signaling.
And then he says, it’s virtue signaling.
Benny Morris
Journalists weren’t in the area.
Journalists weren’t in the area.
Norman Finkelstein
But when Israelis get killed, that’s serious.
But when Israelis get killed, that’s serious.
Steven Bonnell
I never said that. It’s serious on both sides. I didn’t say, respectfully-
I never said that. It’s serious on both sides. I didn’t say, respectfully-
Mouin Rabbani
It’s called [inaudible 04:51:29].
It’s called [inaudible 04:51:29].
Norman Finkelstein
No, you called it virtue signaling.
No, you called it virtue signaling.
Steven Bonnell
No, I’m not virtue signaling, I’m asking a substantive question of who do you assign blame to, or do you play into Norm Finkelstein’s conspiracies that the ambulances should have known immediately who was dead, that the numbers were changed because they were fake.
No, I’m not virtue signaling, I’m asking a substantive question of who do you assign blame to, or do you play into Norm Finkelstein’s conspiracies that the ambulances should have known immediately who was dead, that the numbers were changed because they were fake.
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Borrell, Mr. Borrell-
Mr. Borrell, Mr. Borrell-
Steven Bonnell
Or that maybe 51% of the people were killed by Hamas and Islamic Jihad, but 29% were killed by IDF helicopters.
Or that maybe 51% of the people were killed by Hamas and Islamic Jihad, but 29% were killed by IDF helicopters.
Mouin Rabbani
You asked me a direct question, and you got a direct answer.
You asked me a direct question, and you got a direct answer.
Steven Bonnell
I didn’t, I got majority, which could be anything from 51 to 99.
I didn’t, I got majority, which could be anything from 51 to 99.
Mouin Rabbani
I said a clear majority.
I said a clear majority.
Benny Morris
What percent is a clear majority as opposed to a majority?
What percent is a clear majority as opposed to a majority?
Steven Bonnell
They live in ambiguity.
They live in ambiguity.
Mouin Rabbani
A clear majority, in my view, is well over 50%. Please don’t ask me to be more precise, because I can’t.
A clear majority, in my view, is well over 50%. Please don’t ask me to be more precise, because I can’t.
Benny Morris
You could say 80, 90, 95%.
You could say 80, 90, 95%.
Mouin Rabbani
If I knew that, I would say it.
If I knew that, I would say it.
Benny Morris
I think it’s reasonable. It’s a reasonable supposition.
I think it’s reasonable. It’s a reasonable supposition.
Mouin Rabbani
Perhaps it is, but I…
Perhaps it is, but I…
Norman Finkelstein
Mr. Morris, you are not the best person to be asking that question. I read when you described Operation Defensive Shield, and you said a few dozen homes were destroyed.
Mr. Morris, you are not the best person to be asking that question. I read when you described Operation Defensive Shield, and you said a few dozen homes were destroyed.
Benny Morris
You’re talking about what happened in a Judean refugee camp.
You’re talking about what happened in a Judean refugee camp.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah. And you said-
Yeah. And you said-
Benny Morris
No, the Arabs said 500.
No, the Arabs said 500.
Norman Finkelstein
You said a few died-
You said a few died-
Benny Morris
You guys said 500 Palestinians were killed in a Judean-
You guys said 500 Palestinians were killed in a Judean-
Mouin Rabbani
I never said that.
I never said that.
Benny Morris
No, but that was the statement from the PLO, the Palestinian Authority.
No, but that was the statement from the PLO, the Palestinian Authority.
Norman Finkelstein
You said a few dozen homes-
You said a few dozen homes-
Benny Morris
And that there were massacres there. Yes, a few dozen homes.
And that there were massacres there. Yes, a few dozen homes.
Norman Finkelstein
Yeah.
Yeah.
Benny Morris
That’s right.
That’s right.
Norman Finkelstein
Well, it turned 140 buildings were destroyed-
Well, it turned 140 buildings were destroyed-
Benny Morris
That’s a few dozen.
That’s a few dozen.
Norman Finkelstein
… 5,000 people were left homeless.
… 5,000 people were left homeless.
Benny Morris
How many people were killed?
How many people were killed?
Norman Finkelstein
5,000.
5,000.
Benny Morris
How many were killed?
How many were killed?
Norman Finkelstein
You described it… No, I’m talking about homes destroyed. So you are not the best person to be criticizing what Mouin says when he says clear majority, but he can’t say more. You know why he can’t say more?
You described it… No, I’m talking about homes destroyed. So you are not the best person to be criticizing what Mouin says when he says clear majority, but he can’t say more. You know why he can’t say more?
Benny Morris
He doesn’t know.
He doesn’t know.
Norman Finkelstein
He doesn’t know.
He doesn’t know.
Benny Morris
Yeah, I understand that. I understood that point.
Yeah, I understand that. I understood that point.
Norman Finkelstein
I hope as a historian you understand that.
I hope as a historian you understand that.
Mouin Rabbani
If I was trying to belittle, I would give you a very different answer. I would just say I don’t know. I do know that some were shot, but-
If I was trying to belittle, I would give you a very different answer. I would just say I don’t know. I do know that some were shot, but-
Benny Morris
You know what the right phrase there would be? The overwhelming majority were killed by Arab gunmen, and a very small number were killed by Israelis by accident or whatever.
You know what the right phrase there would be? The overwhelming majority were killed by Arab gunmen, and a very small number were killed by Israelis by accident or whatever.
Norman Finkelstein
You’re not speaking as a historian now.
You’re not speaking as a historian now.
Benny Morris
That’s probably true.
That’s probably true.
Mouin Rabbani
I can state with confidence, a clear majority. Overwhelming majority? You may be correct, but I can’t state that with certainty. I think there’s a very easy way to find out is to have an independent-
I can state with confidence, a clear majority. Overwhelming majority? You may be correct, but I can’t state that with certainty. I think there’s a very easy way to find out is to have an independent-
Benny Morris
Forget independent.
Forget independent.
Mouin Rabbani
Well, of course you forget independent.
Well, of course you forget independent.
Norman Finkelstein
I know you want to forget the law-
I know you want to forget the law-
Benny Morris
Well forget, that doesn’t mean anything.
Well forget, that doesn’t mean anything.
Norman Finkelstein
Forget the law-
Forget the law-
Benny Morris
Independent is the UN High Commission for-
Independent is the UN High Commission for-
Norman Finkelstein
– forget the independent commissioner. No!
– forget the independent commissioner. No!
Benny Morris
… Human Rights, whatever it’s called.
… Human Rights, whatever it’s called.
Mouin Rabbani
Not necessarily.
Not necessarily.
Norman Finkelstein
Just repeat the numbers.
Just repeat the numbers.
Benny Morris
They’re all from barbaric countries. You know, a Syrian was the head of the UN Commission for Human Rights.
They’re all from barbaric countries. You know, a Syrian was the head of the UN Commission for Human Rights.
Mouin Rabbani
But if it was an Israeli, it would have been okay?
But if it was an Israeli, it would have been okay?
Benny Morris
He certainly would have been more honest than a Syrian.
He certainly would have been more honest than a Syrian.
Norman Finkelstein
Oh yeah, sure, of course.
Oh yeah, sure, of course.
Mouin Rabbani
Of course. Oh yeah, from your perspective.
Of course. Oh yeah, from your perspective.
Lex Fridman
Well, to disagree with Steven, I thought this was extremely valuable, and at times really the view of history, the passion. I’m really grateful that you would spend your really valuable time.
Well, to disagree with Steven, I thought this was extremely valuable, and at times really the view of history, the passion. I’m really grateful that you would spend your really valuable time.
One more question, since we have two historians here. Briefly, from a history perspective, what do you hope your legacy is as historians, Benny and Norm, will be of the work that you’ve put out there? Maybe Norm, you can go first, and try to say briefly.
Norman Finkelstein
I think there’s a value to preserving the record. I’m not optimistic about where things are going to end up. There was a very nice book written by a woman named Helen Hunt Jackson at the end of the 19th century, describing what was done to the Native Americans. She called it a century of dishonor, and she described in vivid, poignant detail what was done to the Native Americans. Did it save them? No. Did it help them? Probably not. Did it preserve their memory? Yes, and I think there’s a value to that. There was a famous film by Sergei Eisenstein, it was either Battleship Potemkin or Mother, I can’t remember which one. The last scene was the Tsar’s troops mowing down all the Russian people. He pans the scene.
I think there’s a value to preserving the record. I’m not optimistic about where things are going to end up. There was a very nice book written by a woman named Helen Hunt Jackson at the end of the 19th century, describing what was done to the Native Americans. She called it a century of dishonor, and she described in vivid, poignant detail what was done to the Native Americans. Did it save them? No. Did it help them? Probably not. Did it preserve their memory? Yes, and I think there’s a value to that. There was a famous film by Sergei Eisenstein, it was either Battleship Potemkin or Mother, I can’t remember which one. The last scene was the Tsar’s troops mowing down all the Russian people. He pans the scene.
Benny Morris
Not all the Russian people, just a few of them.
Not all the Russian people, just a few of them.
Norman Finkelstein
Well, he pan the massacre.
Well, he pan the massacre.
Mouin Rabbani
But he could have killed a lot more.
But he could have killed a lot more.
Norman Finkelstein
And the last words of the movie were, “Proletarians,” exclamation point, “Remember,” exclamation point. And I’ve seen it as my life’s work to preserve the memory and to remember. I didn’t expect that anyone would read my book on Gaza. It’s very dense, it gives me even a bit of a headache to read at least one of the chapters.
And the last words of the movie were, “Proletarians,” exclamation point, “Remember,” exclamation point. And I’ve seen it as my life’s work to preserve the memory and to remember. I didn’t expect that anyone would read my book on Gaza. It’s very dense, it gives me even a bit of a headache to read at least one of the chapters.
Mouin Rabbani
You wrote a book on Gaza?
You wrote a book on Gaza?
Norman Finkelstein
But I thought that the memory deserves to be preserved.
But I thought that the memory deserves to be preserved.
Mouin Rabbani
Amen.
Amen.
Benny Morris
Well, I would say very briefly, unlike my colleague, I think writing the truth about what happened in history, in various periods of history, if I’ve done a little bit of that, I’m happy.
Well, I would say very briefly, unlike my colleague, I think writing the truth about what happened in history, in various periods of history, if I’ve done a little bit of that, I’m happy.
Lex Fridman
Thank you Norm, thank you Benny, thank you Steven, thank you Mouin.
Thank you Norm, thank you Benny, thank you Steven, thank you Mouin.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Norman Finkelstein, Benny Morris, Mouin Rabbani, and Steven Bonnell. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Lyndon B. Johnson. “Peace is a journey of a thousand miles, and it must be taken one step at a time.” Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Kimbal Musk: The Art of Cooking, Tesla, SpaceX, Zip2, and Family | Lex Fridman Podcast #417
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #417 with Kimbal Musk.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
Growing up in South Africa, you said it was a violent place. What are some formative moments that you remember from that time?
In South Africa, people died, or people were killed. I saw someone killed in front of me. I was getting off a train and it’s a very violent train known for violence. We were stupid kids. We didn’t really listen to our parents. We went on this train and the doors opened and I had people trying to get off the train and in front of me, two Black people, one Black guy just stabbed this knife in the side of this other Black guy’s head and you’re like, “What the fuck?” And you just, I got to get off the train.
When my cousin, Russ and I, again, we’re stupid kids, we shouldn’t be doing this, but we go into the townships where a lot of the violence would be happening, and we really didn’t see most of the violence there. It was in these more protests and so forth. But there’s a joy that also comes from lower value of human life. There’s a real joy. Everyone was like, well, I mean it’s beautiful. We’d have dinner with Black friends, friends with their family, and we were still pretty young and there was just a real joy to it.
He was really [inaudible 00:09:59], but I’m not connected to him, but he taught me, the phrase I used to have was he taught me what not to do, so I still actually learned a lot. What kind of human not to be, what kind of actions not to take. And so that kind of closer to living up to his mistakes. But my father was such a train wreck that it’s not really mistakes. It’s like intentional actions of what not to do. Okay, look, don’t do that.
So, I went to the grocery store and back in those days, a butcher is separate to the grocery store, and I went to the butcher and I said, “What can I cook?” And he pulled out a chicken and he said, “This is the easiest recipe for you. Just put it on a pan in an oven, a hot oven.” Because back then the ovens weren’t necessarily like 400 degrees or 450 or whatever. “And put it in a hot oven for one hour and enjoy.” That was it. And so I went home and actually I also bought some french fries, I’ll tell you that as well. I’m a kid, of course, I went french fries. So, the roast chicken with french fries and the chicken came out and it was just fantastic.
And I was like, “Wow, this is a very powerful thing that I’ve now got.” Where in no other way could I have that connection with my family. I mean, obviously we stay connected, we’re very close, et cetera, but in no other way can we sit down and just talk about things or talk about whatever’s on our mind or just to not even talk, just to be at the table together. And I’ve done that now through my whole life. My kids still for my family, and we will do gratitudes at the beginning of our meal. And it’s just, I think what kept me cooking, what made my love of cooking so great was actually the fact that we would sit down-
Well, this is now happening at scale with all of these, what do you, call trolling or whatever. And I’ve sat at the bar and I’ve had a hardcore Trump supporter, and I’m just curious, just like, “Tell me what, I’m not a Trump supporter, but tell me more.” And actually it draws the conversation out because you’re there for an hour or longer, so there’s no rush to get the answer. And I think that’s a big difference. I’ve had one time where just a couple months ago I had someone, I was sitting at the community table, we have a community table in the restaurant, and I didn’t know him too well, but he asked me, did I know that 9-11 was a conspiracy and it didn’t really happen?
And somehow that kind of grounds us to, we’re just a bunch of descendants of apes here, just kind of grateful to be alive, frankly, and grateful to be consuming this thing which keeps us alive. And in that context, you can talk about all kinds of stuff. You can discuss flat earth and enjoy it.
So, they’re like, “Oh, no one’s ever asked me that before,” so then they become vulnerable. And then it’s something as simple as, “What’s the most fun thing you’ve done recently and what is the most fun thing you’re looking forward to?” I have gotten into, with those prompts, I’ve gotten into hours long discussions on God. I’ve gotten into hours long discussions on love. I’ve got into hours long discussions on anger. It’s actually amazing when people are just asked a question, ” What’s the most fun thing you’ve done lately?” Well, why would anger come up? Well, actually, they’re in a vulnerable place, so it’ll just kind of come out of them.
So, they’re all in it together, we need to have water. But there’s still a little bit of tension as well in the background. And I think that’s what restaurants do is a very, very subtle version of that. You’re in a room with strangers and you’re a little cluster. Okay, fine, you guys are connected in it, but you’re in a room with strangers, and it’s just something that adds that energy to the meal.
So you’d make a carrot puree out of that and then you’d carrots that are more typical in shape and size, you might roast them for dinner. So it’s the appreciation for vegetables in general. I probably would say carrots is my favorite just because that was an example of one where I’ve really had to learn how to use the different types of carrots that come from all of our farms. And it’s fun. It’s a fun ingredient. If you just went to the whole foods or just went to a grocery store and you just got exactly the same carrot every time, less fun. But go to a farmer’s market and see what you get and you’ll see they’re quite different.
They have total respect for this human and he can do whatever he wants. And one of the things he wanted to teach was how do you make an omelet, a French omelet, and it’s really fundamentally the same thing. It’s a soft scrambled eggs that you fold and the love that he put into the time with us. And of course he’s a legend. There were moments like that where I’m like, wow, okay. Also, just like the other chefs, he didn’t have any concern berating anyone. So he berated our master chefs saying, “I don’t trust these people to teach you how to make scrambled eggs, so I’m going to do it instead.”
The next day, it was Valentine’s Day. Tomorrow’s Valentine’s Day. I’m just going to have a nice day with the family and my wife at the time. And we went to a children’s run to do the inner tube run, and the tubes are small, but everyone uses the same tube. So I’m six foot five, my kids are four years old, and everyone uses the same size tube. It should have been a message to me not to get on this thing. But I went and got on it and on the first run, I went down and you’re going super fast, 35 miles an hour, and the tube hit the braking mats and it stopped. The tube just stopped where it was. It just threw me. My head was facing downhill, so that’s created the wrong center of gravity. So instead of braking, it just threw me.
I landed on my head. My head went into my chest, compression into my chest, down like that. I ruptured my spine at C6 and C7. And in the blink of a second, I was paralyzed. I was like, “What?” Just impossible to comprehend. And they put this big thing, this halo on my head, and they take me to the hospital, which was more of a medical clinic. And I’m just like, “What is going on here?”
So the doctor says, “Look, the way you broke your neck, really, at a zero degree angle, that is so rare, but as a result, there is no twisting of the spine. We think that we can get the blood out of your spinal column and you should get some or maybe all of your movement back.” And I was like, “Oh, okay. I think I’m going to be fine. I guess I’m going to be fine.” And then I realized I had tears just streaming down the side of my face and I was like, “Whoa, man. I have no idea what is going on.”
It was just clear. It was a clear voice. It wasn’t for a moment. It wasn’t like a flash of light or anything. It was probably two weeks of clear voice.
So I went to business school and I busted my ass to get a kick-ass summer job, and I got a job in one of the main banks. It was in Toronto, but it was like their version of Wall Street. I was so disappointed with the people that I was around. I was just like, whoa. I totally misunderstood what the banking world is. It was a very large bank. I’m sure if I’d gone to a more aggressive one, maybe I would’ve had a better experience. I say aggressive, meaning someone was paying attention. This was just a…
And what I was astounded by was not so much that there was a magic trick, it was the lack of appreciation for innovation. They just looked at it and they were like, “Huh, that’s nice.” And I was like, “We’re going to have someone spend hundreds of hours doing something and now it’s something you can do in a minute.”
And changed those three things. And it was like a watershed moment just all of a sudden. And I just followed the instructions of what this guy told me. All of a sudden, every single sale I would make, I was like, I can’t believe that it was really my lack of humility to learn from someone else. I was like, “No, I’m going to prove that I can do this without your teachings,” and I was going to fail.
Navtech was building it for NeverLost, for Hertz NeverLost, which would come out a few years later. This was not something that people knew existed. This was something we discovered that it existed. Let’s put it on the internet and share it with the world.
Because electric motors, they have constant torque, incredible power, put it in a car that looks like a sports car. So the idea was to put it in the Lotus release, redesign it a bit. And even at that point I was like, “This is theoretically good, so I’m going to join and help build it.” But I was not convinced that it would work because General Motors had done such a terrible job of making everyone think that these things are terrible. But I was curious. And the time that I fell in love with the company and its mission was I was driving in what’s called a mule where we take a car and we take the engine out and we put in electric drive train and I drove it. Even the dashboards, there’s no dashboard. It’s just you got a steering wheel and it’s just wires and everything around. And I remember there’s a street, we were running the Bay Area called Bing Street, and I was just like… No traffic. So I’m just going to drive this on the floor and see what happens.
And it was a feeling I’d never experienced before. Gasoline cars have an inertia to them. So you go… This was being shot out of a cannon. And I was like, “Okay, this is going to be real.”
So I got to know a couple of people locally and got to know this one guy who had a mobile home, best view in the world, but it’s just a mobile home with a patch of grass next to it. And I was just desperate to find food that wasn’t from the cafeteria because this is the worst food you can imagine. And I met him and he showed me this little tiny little grocery store, which had a few things like canned tomatoes. And this is, again, your middle of nowhere. It’s just nothing fresh. And I made this dish that was a version of an Italian version of chili, just baked beans and sweating onions and then tomatoes. And it was a big pot of food. It’s a group of people. We didn’t even have a table. And we just put the big pot in the middle and we had our little paper plates and we took a scoop as we needed it.
And it was… Do we need the gathering place of food brings people together in the most difficult times, and it was one of my favorite memories because I was able to bring my gift to this group of incredible people that their hearts were broken. And to sit there and share a meal and feel the life kind come back into us and by the end of the night, we’re actually having a good time.
And so, “Okay, let’s go do that.” So I’ll help out where I think we really can make a difference. But if you step back a little, things are actually getting better. It’s just a bumpy ride.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 1:02 – Growing up in South Africa
- 13:32 – Cooking
- 36:18 – Ingredients
- 43:23 – Anthony Bourdain
- 45:38 – Cooking school
- 1:01:58 – Life-threatening accident
- 1:16:02 – Road trip across US
- 1:27:45 – Zip2
- 1:32:28 – Tesla
- 1:39:53 – SpaceX
- 1:43:36 – Hope for the future
Introduction
Kimbal Musk
For me, cooking is an art.
For me, cooking is an art.
Lex Fridman
What’s your favorite ingredient to cook with?
What’s your favorite ingredient to cook with?
Kimbal Musk
There isn’t one. It’s more like when there is one, it really is one. There’s peaches on the cover of this cookbook. Those peaches, those were in August, Colorado peaches. It just doesn’t get any better than that.
There isn’t one. It’s more like when there is one, it really is one. There’s peaches on the cover of this cookbook. Those peaches, those were in August, Colorado peaches. It just doesn’t get any better than that.
Lex Fridman
On that day, at that moment, that was best ingredient?
On that day, at that moment, that was best ingredient?
Kimbal Musk
That was the best, but that only lasts for a week and then they don’t taste so great, but damn are they so good in that moment and you just can’t stop wanting to use that ingredient.
That was the best, but that only lasts for a week and then they don’t taste so great, but damn are they so good in that moment and you just can’t stop wanting to use that ingredient.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Kimbal Musk, a long time entrepreneur and chef and author of a new cookbook called The Kitchen Cookbook, Cooking for Your Community. You should check it out. It is in fact the first cookbook I’ve ever owned. I’ve already made stuff from it and it’s delicious. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Kimbal Musk.
The following is a conversation with Kimbal Musk, a long time entrepreneur and chef and author of a new cookbook called The Kitchen Cookbook, Cooking for Your Community. You should check it out. It is in fact the first cookbook I’ve ever owned. I’ve already made stuff from it and it’s delicious. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Kimbal Musk.
Growing up in South Africa
Growing up in South Africa, you said it was a violent place. What are some formative moments that you remember from that time?
Kimbal Musk
South Africa was, so I grew up in apartheid South Africa, but more specifically the fall of apartheid. I was a teenager in the ’80s and our community would, part of our social life frankly, was the anti-apartheid protests and to go be with white people, Black people, kind of mixing it all altogether. The most formative experiences, frankly, how much I appreciate a place like America where we have value for human life. So, that was a country where human life was not valued. It’s a weird thing to come from that to here where we take it so seriously, if someone dies in a war or something like that, and we just didn’t take it seriously.
South Africa was, so I grew up in apartheid South Africa, but more specifically the fall of apartheid. I was a teenager in the ’80s and our community would, part of our social life frankly, was the anti-apartheid protests and to go be with white people, Black people, kind of mixing it all altogether. The most formative experiences, frankly, how much I appreciate a place like America where we have value for human life. So, that was a country where human life was not valued. It’s a weird thing to come from that to here where we take it so seriously, if someone dies in a war or something like that, and we just didn’t take it seriously.
In South Africa, people died, or people were killed. I saw someone killed in front of me. I was getting off a train and it’s a very violent train known for violence. We were stupid kids. We didn’t really listen to our parents. We went on this train and the doors opened and I had people trying to get off the train and in front of me, two Black people, one Black guy just stabbed this knife in the side of this other Black guy’s head and you’re like, “What the fuck?” And you just, I got to get off the train.
Lex Fridman
How old were you at this time?
How old were you at this time?
Kimbal Musk
Probably 16 or 17. And I got to get off the train and everyone is trying to get me to get off because they’re all behind me. So, I step off and I step into the pool of blood one foot, and then I just walk for about a hundred paces while the stickiness of the blood just kind of for my sneakers just on one foot just leaves a footprint behind me. And you just walk on. You just walk on.
Probably 16 or 17. And I got to get off the train and everyone is trying to get me to get off because they’re all behind me. So, I step off and I step into the pool of blood one foot, and then I just walk for about a hundred paces while the stickiness of the blood just kind of for my sneakers just on one foot just leaves a footprint behind me. And you just walk on. You just walk on.
Lex Fridman
Did the others walk on as well?
Did the others walk on as well?
Lex Fridman
Go to the concert.
Go to the concert.
Kimbal Musk
Everyone walked on.
Everyone walked on.
Lex Fridman
That’s an interesting point you make. Underlying the violence is a kind of philosophy that human life is disposable, the individual life is disposable. I mean, that underlies many ideologies. I grew up in the Soviet Union, the value of human life was lower there than in the United States. The value of the individual in the United States is really high. There’s probably an index you can put together.
That’s an interesting point you make. Underlying the violence is a kind of philosophy that human life is disposable, the individual life is disposable. I mean, that underlies many ideologies. I grew up in the Soviet Union, the value of human life was lower there than in the United States. The value of the individual in the United States is really high. There’s probably an index you can put together.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, right, exactly.
Yeah, right, exactly.
Lex Fridman
Per nation, that’s a really interesting way to put it because violence is much easier on a mass scale. Suffering, causing suffering on a mass scale is much easier when you don’t value the human life.
Per nation, that’s a really interesting way to put it because violence is much easier on a mass scale. Suffering, causing suffering on a mass scale is much easier when you don’t value the human life.
Kimbal Musk
I’ve heard this before, which I think I agree with, is when someone is killed, someone is taken from our lives. The vacuum that it creates, the social vacuum is extraordinarily painful and it truly is true. I mean, if someone in my community passes away, it’s very, very sad for me. And when you go to a place where, or live, grow up in a place where that human life is not valued, there’s something about, there’s a little bit less of the social vacuum created because everyone is kind of expecting everyone to potentially be taken out at any moment. But then there’s also a beauty to it because there’s a much more of a celebratory element.
I’ve heard this before, which I think I agree with, is when someone is killed, someone is taken from our lives. The vacuum that it creates, the social vacuum is extraordinarily painful and it truly is true. I mean, if someone in my community passes away, it’s very, very sad for me. And when you go to a place where, or live, grow up in a place where that human life is not valued, there’s something about, there’s a little bit less of the social vacuum created because everyone is kind of expecting everyone to potentially be taken out at any moment. But then there’s also a beauty to it because there’s a much more of a celebratory element.
When my cousin, Russ and I, again, we’re stupid kids, we shouldn’t be doing this, but we go into the townships where a lot of the violence would be happening, and we really didn’t see most of the violence there. It was in these more protests and so forth. But there’s a joy that also comes from lower value of human life. There’s a real joy. Everyone was like, well, I mean it’s beautiful. We’d have dinner with Black friends, friends with their family, and we were still pretty young and there was just a real joy to it.
Lex Fridman
When you accept mortality, you can really enjoy life.
When you accept mortality, you can really enjoy life.
Kimbal Musk
You can really enjoy life. I mean, I think that’s actually quite a nice insight. I’ve never really put it that way, but I think that’s right actually. I think you just chill out a bit, takes things a little less seriously.
You can really enjoy life. I mean, I think that’s actually quite a nice insight. I’ve never really put it that way, but I think that’s right actually. I think you just chill out a bit, takes things a little less seriously.
Lex Fridman
Because life does end for everybody.
Because life does end for everybody.
Kimbal Musk
It does. Right.
It does. Right.
Lex Fridman
And if you just head on accept that fact, you can just enjoy every single moment and let go of this attachment and just enjoy the moment.
And if you just head on accept that fact, you can just enjoy every single moment and let go of this attachment and just enjoy the moment.
Kimbal Musk
I do love that we all live longer and so forth, but we should live longer with the goal of joy and the goal of happiness and peace, not some form of misery that you choose to attach yourself to.
I do love that we all live longer and so forth, but we should live longer with the goal of joy and the goal of happiness and peace, not some form of misery that you choose to attach yourself to.
Lex Fridman
Maximize joy.
Maximize joy.
Kimbal Musk
Maximize joy. That’s right.
Maximize joy. That’s right.
Lex Fridman
There’s a story that Walter Isaacson writes about where Elon got beat up pretty bad and you were there, and then you also had to watch your dad yell at Elon for an hour, calling him worthless, all those kinds of things. You said it was the worst memory of your life. What do you make of such cruelty? What do you remember from that time?
There’s a story that Walter Isaacson writes about where Elon got beat up pretty bad and you were there, and then you also had to watch your dad yell at Elon for an hour, calling him worthless, all those kinds of things. You said it was the worst memory of your life. What do you make of such cruelty? What do you remember from that time?
Kimbal Musk
I mean, it was horrible. I think coming back to the point of low value of human life, they tried to kill him. There was no holding back, so I just watched someone… It wasn’t just one, but there was a main person and then there was a few others that piled in. They tried to kill him in front of me. We were eating sandwiches on a staircase at the school, in outdoor staircase. They were not coming after me and I just had to watch and I couldn’t help. It was one of the saddest, most difficult experiences. It was just awful.
I mean, it was horrible. I think coming back to the point of low value of human life, they tried to kill him. There was no holding back, so I just watched someone… It wasn’t just one, but there was a main person and then there was a few others that piled in. They tried to kill him in front of me. We were eating sandwiches on a staircase at the school, in outdoor staircase. They were not coming after me and I just had to watch and I couldn’t help. It was one of the saddest, most difficult experiences. It was just awful.
Lex Fridman
Just like that, life can end.
Just like that, life can end.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
If could have been you.
If could have been you.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. I think I’ve had a near death experience where I almost died. I was in 2010 and I think that… And I broke my neck and I can go into that story in a moment, but this was different. This comes back to the low value of human life part where if someone had killed my brother, if that person had beat him to death, which he was trying to do, life would’ve gone on. That’s like an insane thought in an American, well maybe in some tough neighborhoods, but for the most part, it’s another thing.
Yeah. I think I’ve had a near death experience where I almost died. I was in 2010 and I think that… And I broke my neck and I can go into that story in a moment, but this was different. This comes back to the low value of human life part where if someone had killed my brother, if that person had beat him to death, which he was trying to do, life would’ve gone on. That’s like an insane thought in an American, well maybe in some tough neighborhoods, but for the most part, it’s another thing.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, the brutality of that, the mundaneness of the brutality.
Yeah, the brutality of that, the mundaneness of the brutality.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
It makes you think of all the places in the world that that’s happening.
It makes you think of all the places in the world that that’s happening.
Kimbal Musk
Exactly. Exactly.
Exactly. Exactly.
Lex Fridman
And all the beautiful people that just disappear.
And all the beautiful people that just disappear.
Kimbal Musk
I always say to people who have an opinion about America that this is a really bad country or whatever, and I say, “Look, please go try another country before you say that. Not to say that America can’t get better, but please go try another country,” because not having that perspective or having a perspective that, I don’t know, they’ll catch up on their shoulder about the country that they’re in. Okay, go try another country and then come back and tell me, pick any country. It doesn’t have to be some very violent country. You go pick any country and you just realize that actually the world doesn’t think the same way that America thinks, and you are going to just learn a perspective that I think gives you a better way to critique where we live in America.
I always say to people who have an opinion about America that this is a really bad country or whatever, and I say, “Look, please go try another country before you say that. Not to say that America can’t get better, but please go try another country,” because not having that perspective or having a perspective that, I don’t know, they’ll catch up on their shoulder about the country that they’re in. Okay, go try another country and then come back and tell me, pick any country. It doesn’t have to be some very violent country. You go pick any country and you just realize that actually the world doesn’t think the same way that America thinks, and you are going to just learn a perspective that I think gives you a better way to critique where we live in America.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s humbling. You said that your dad was a roller coaster of affection and then verbal abuse. Walter Isaacson quotes Barack Obama who said, “Someone once said that every man is trying to live up to his father’s expectations or makeup for his father’s mistakes, and I suppose that may explain my particular malady.” Is part of that ring true for you?
Yeah, it’s humbling. You said that your dad was a roller coaster of affection and then verbal abuse. Walter Isaacson quotes Barack Obama who said, “Someone once said that every man is trying to live up to his father’s expectations or makeup for his father’s mistakes, and I suppose that may explain my particular malady.” Is part of that ring true for you?
Kimbal Musk
What I thought you were going to say, thought you were going to end the sentence with live up to my father’s expectations. That’s what most people say. But then you said the second part, which is make up for his mistakes. I think that’s actually, that one rings true for me.
What I thought you were going to say, thought you were going to end the sentence with live up to my father’s expectations. That’s what most people say. But then you said the second part, which is make up for his mistakes. I think that’s actually, that one rings true for me.
He was really [inaudible 00:09:59], but I’m not connected to him, but he taught me, the phrase I used to have was he taught me what not to do, so I still actually learned a lot. What kind of human not to be, what kind of actions not to take. And so that kind of closer to living up to his mistakes. But my father was such a train wreck that it’s not really mistakes. It’s like intentional actions of what not to do. Okay, look, don’t do that.
Lex Fridman
But there’s still the trauma of that. It has an effect on the human psychology and can permeate through time. So, it has probably complex indirect effects on who you are, the good and the bad.
But there’s still the trauma of that. It has an effect on the human psychology and can permeate through time. So, it has probably complex indirect effects on who you are, the good and the bad.
Kimbal Musk
There’s a critique that my friends give me, which is when they’re talking to me, I kind of just drift away. That just, I’m still looking at them, I’m still nodding, might even respond to them in their conversation, but I’m actually not there. And I’ve realized that actually that grew up because my father would just, verbal abuse is one way to say it. It is abuse, but it’s more just verbal diarrhea for you for hours and constantly saying, “Do you understand?” He wants to make sure that I’m paying attention. So, I trained myself to look like I’m paying attention, but I’m not.
There’s a critique that my friends give me, which is when they’re talking to me, I kind of just drift away. That just, I’m still looking at them, I’m still nodding, might even respond to them in their conversation, but I’m actually not there. And I’ve realized that actually that grew up because my father would just, verbal abuse is one way to say it. It is abuse, but it’s more just verbal diarrhea for you for hours and constantly saying, “Do you understand?” He wants to make sure that I’m paying attention. So, I trained myself to look like I’m paying attention, but I’m not.
Lex Fridman
To disappear to someplace.
To disappear to someplace.
Kimbal Musk
Disappear to someplace.
Disappear to someplace.
Lex Fridman
Wherever that is.
Wherever that is.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, I do that less and less over time, but I-
Yeah, I do that less and less over time, but I-
Lex Fridman
That path has been paved somewhere in your mind at childhood, so it could be easy to walk down it. You and Elon were close growing up, you’re still close. What did you learn from each other? How did you compliment each other?
That path has been paved somewhere in your mind at childhood, so it could be easy to walk down it. You and Elon were close growing up, you’re still close. What did you learn from each other? How did you compliment each other?
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, I think we are a good compliment. I’ll talk for myself first. My strength is definitely on the social side. I love the gathering place and I love putting people together in person and I love to have vibrant debates and conversations. I’ve been doing that forever, including throwing fun parties and stuff where I bring people together and I really want people to have fun, but be vulnerable in not just silly partying, just actually let’s all connect. The definition for me of a good party is people laugh and cry. I want to have people have an emotional connection. I go to Burning Man every year, and that is, there’s no question you will cry at some point during Burning Man.
Yeah, I think we are a good compliment. I’ll talk for myself first. My strength is definitely on the social side. I love the gathering place and I love putting people together in person and I love to have vibrant debates and conversations. I’ve been doing that forever, including throwing fun parties and stuff where I bring people together and I really want people to have fun, but be vulnerable in not just silly partying, just actually let’s all connect. The definition for me of a good party is people laugh and cry. I want to have people have an emotional connection. I go to Burning Man every year, and that is, there’s no question you will cry at some point during Burning Man.
Lex Fridman
No small talk.
No small talk.
Kimbal Musk
No small talk. Yeah, exactly. No small talk. You’re totally right on most parties, not parties, but most events you go to are like clubs, these sort of nightclubs. I never go to those. And my joke is why would I want to go to a place where I pay to shout small talk in the dark?
No small talk. Yeah, exactly. No small talk. You’re totally right on most parties, not parties, but most events you go to are like clubs, these sort of nightclubs. I never go to those. And my joke is why would I want to go to a place where I pay to shout small talk in the dark?
Lex Fridman
That’s a good line. That’s what it feels like. The only reason I enjoy those places is the full absurdity of exactly that.
That’s a good line. That’s what it feels like. The only reason I enjoy those places is the full absurdity of exactly that.
Kimbal Musk
Right. It’s totally absurd.
Right. It’s totally absurd.
Lex Fridman
What are we doing? What is this? What is this life?
What are we doing? What is this? What is this life?
Kimbal Musk
My compliment for my brother was just bringing joy and social connection and he’s an engineering genius. I’ve worked with him forever and we do compliment each other.
My compliment for my brother was just bringing joy and social connection and he’s an engineering genius. I’ve worked with him forever and we do compliment each other.
Cooking
Lex Fridman
You just came out with a cookbook, by the way. Thank you for giving me my first cookbook. I feel legit.
You just came out with a cookbook, by the way. Thank you for giving me my first cookbook. I feel legit.
Kimbal Musk
I love that. Your first cookbook.
I love that. Your first cookbook.
Lex Fridman
I’m going to keep it on the counter and it’s going to give me legitimacy when anyone comes over. Hey, listen, I’m basically a chef now.
I’m going to keep it on the counter and it’s going to give me legitimacy when anyone comes over. Hey, listen, I’m basically a chef now.
Kimbal Musk
That’s right. Exactly.
That’s right. Exactly.
Lex Fridman
When did you first fall in love with cooking?
When did you first fall in love with cooking?
Kimbal Musk
I started cooking when I was 11 years old. My mom, she’s wonderful, but she is self-admittedly a bad cook. But at the time it was, and I think anyone with kids goes through this, your kids just want something like spaghetti bolognese or a burger or something. And my mom would do brown bread, plain yogurt, and boiled squash. The absolute most disgusting things that a child could imagine eating. And so I said, “Can I cook?” And she said, “Yeah, if you want to cook, no problem.”
I started cooking when I was 11 years old. My mom, she’s wonderful, but she is self-admittedly a bad cook. But at the time it was, and I think anyone with kids goes through this, your kids just want something like spaghetti bolognese or a burger or something. And my mom would do brown bread, plain yogurt, and boiled squash. The absolute most disgusting things that a child could imagine eating. And so I said, “Can I cook?” And she said, “Yeah, if you want to cook, no problem.”
So, I went to the grocery store and back in those days, a butcher is separate to the grocery store, and I went to the butcher and I said, “What can I cook?” And he pulled out a chicken and he said, “This is the easiest recipe for you. Just put it on a pan in an oven, a hot oven.” Because back then the ovens weren’t necessarily like 400 degrees or 450 or whatever. “And put it in a hot oven for one hour and enjoy.” That was it. And so I went home and actually I also bought some french fries, I’ll tell you that as well. I’m a kid, of course, I went french fries. So, the roast chicken with french fries and the chicken came out and it was just fantastic.
Lex Fridman
It was?
It was?
Kimbal Musk
Absolutely fantastic.
Absolutely fantastic.
Lex Fridman
That’s incredible, by the way.
That’s incredible, by the way.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
You didn’t screw it up the first time.
You didn’t screw it up the first time.
Kimbal Musk
First of all, I think that also kicks off the magic. If you screw it up and you’re like, “Oh, maybe this is not for me.” So for me, it really did kick it off.
First of all, I think that also kicks off the magic. If you screw it up and you’re like, “Oh, maybe this is not for me.” So for me, it really did kick it off.
Lex Fridman
You started out on a high note.
You started out on a high note.
Kimbal Musk
Right, exactly. But I tell the french fry part, which was a disaster. I cooked the french fries, but I didn’t heat the oil first, so I just put the potatoes in the oil and I waited for to heat up. And I just was throwing up later that night, your body can’t ingest that much because it sucks the oils in. And so that was a disaster. But at the time it tasted good. The real magic, which I also found was wonderful, was when I cooked, my brother, my sister, my mom, all very, very busy, very intense people, would sit down and we would have a meal together.
Right, exactly. But I tell the french fry part, which was a disaster. I cooked the french fries, but I didn’t heat the oil first, so I just put the potatoes in the oil and I waited for to heat up. And I just was throwing up later that night, your body can’t ingest that much because it sucks the oils in. And so that was a disaster. But at the time it tasted good. The real magic, which I also found was wonderful, was when I cooked, my brother, my sister, my mom, all very, very busy, very intense people, would sit down and we would have a meal together.
And I was like, “Wow, this is a very powerful thing that I’ve now got.” Where in no other way could I have that connection with my family. I mean, obviously we stay connected, we’re very close, et cetera, but in no other way can we sit down and just talk about things or talk about whatever’s on our mind or just to not even talk, just to be at the table together. And I’ve done that now through my whole life. My kids still for my family, and we will do gratitudes at the beginning of our meal. And it’s just, I think what kept me cooking, what made my love of cooking so great was actually the fact that we would sit down-
Lex Fridman
Together.
Together.
Kimbal Musk
… and be present with each other. And I’m also just horrible with that too, so I also get to be present.
… and be present with each other. And I’m also just horrible with that too, so I also get to be present.
Lex Fridman
What is that about food that brings people together and not just together, but really together where you’re paying attention? What is that? Why is it food? What else does that? Sometimes maybe alcohol can do that, which is a kind of food, I guess [inaudible 00:17:18]-
What is that about food that brings people together and not just together, but really together where you’re paying attention? What is that? Why is it food? What else does that? Sometimes maybe alcohol can do that, which is a kind of food, I guess [inaudible 00:17:18]-
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, but I think alcohol is different because you’re usually standing when you’re doing alcohol. You’re socializing, but you’re just going to stay more in the small talk zone. Whereas if you sit down, and I see this in my restaurant, in the kitchen in Boulder where we have every viewpoint or we go to Denver, every viewpoint. In restaurant in Chicago, every viewpoint. And the physical presence of someone being right there is people, they’re just different, absolutely different to what they are online. I think we all know the difference between you send an email to someone and they misunderstand the email and “Oh, if I just had talked to the person, it would’ve been fine.”
Yeah, but I think alcohol is different because you’re usually standing when you’re doing alcohol. You’re socializing, but you’re just going to stay more in the small talk zone. Whereas if you sit down, and I see this in my restaurant, in the kitchen in Boulder where we have every viewpoint or we go to Denver, every viewpoint. In restaurant in Chicago, every viewpoint. And the physical presence of someone being right there is people, they’re just different, absolutely different to what they are online. I think we all know the difference between you send an email to someone and they misunderstand the email and “Oh, if I just had talked to the person, it would’ve been fine.”
Well, this is now happening at scale with all of these, what do you, call trolling or whatever. And I’ve sat at the bar and I’ve had a hardcore Trump supporter, and I’m just curious, just like, “Tell me what, I’m not a Trump supporter, but tell me more.” And actually it draws the conversation out because you’re there for an hour or longer, so there’s no rush to get the answer. And I think that’s a big difference. I’ve had one time where just a couple months ago I had someone, I was sitting at the community table, we have a community table in the restaurant, and I didn’t know him too well, but he asked me, did I know that 9-11 was a conspiracy and it didn’t really happen?
Lex Fridman
It didn’t happen? Yeah.;
It didn’t happen? Yeah.;
Kimbal Musk
And I was like, “Huh.” So, I was at 9-11, [inaudible 00:19:02] I was there physically there. So, it’s like, nope.
And I was like, “Huh.” So, I was at 9-11, [inaudible 00:19:02] I was there physically there. So, it’s like, nope.
Lex Fridman
Allegedly.
Allegedly.
Kimbal Musk
There’s no doubt in my mind. But I didn’t want to interrupt what he had to say. I let him talk for five minutes, six minutes, seven minutes. Again, you’re there for a while, so you’re not in a rush to jump in and argue. And then I shared that I was there, and I think because I had been willing to listen to him, he was willing to listen to me. And I don’t know if he changed his mind. Certainly doesn’t change my mind, but it was actually a pretty cool conversation to get into each other’s mind.
There’s no doubt in my mind. But I didn’t want to interrupt what he had to say. I let him talk for five minutes, six minutes, seven minutes. Again, you’re there for a while, so you’re not in a rush to jump in and argue. And then I shared that I was there, and I think because I had been willing to listen to him, he was willing to listen to me. And I don’t know if he changed his mind. Certainly doesn’t change my mind, but it was actually a pretty cool conversation to get into each other’s mind.
Lex Fridman
Well, I think you connect on a different level. Not on the level of the conspiracy, but on the level of basic humanity.
Well, I think you connect on a different level. Not on the level of the conspiracy, but on the level of basic humanity.
Kimbal Musk
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
That’s what you really connect on. And then it almost becomes interesting and fun that you can exchange ideas, even crazy ideas, out there ideas, and kind of play with them. We humans are good at that.
That’s what you really connect on. And then it almost becomes interesting and fun that you can exchange ideas, even crazy ideas, out there ideas, and kind of play with them. We humans are good at that.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, exactly. I like the term play with them because what you’re not trying to do is shut the conversation down. You’re also not trying to-
Yeah, exactly. I like the term play with them because what you’re not trying to do is shut the conversation down. You’re also not trying to-
Lex Fridman
Talk down on me.
Talk down on me.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, yeah, exactly. This guys is, let me just be nice while I totally disagree with this person. You can do that for a few minutes. You can’t do that for two hours.
Yeah, yeah, exactly. This guys is, let me just be nice while I totally disagree with this person. You can do that for a few minutes. You can’t do that for two hours.
Lex Fridman
And there’s something about food that completely, I don’t know, it must be evolutionary that it makes us vulnerable in a way that even just standing there for a prolonged period of time doesn’t. There’s something about, you know when the animals gather to the water or whatever, this kind of experience where you’re just like, “All right, let’s just acknowledge together that we need sustenance.”
And there’s something about food that completely, I don’t know, it must be evolutionary that it makes us vulnerable in a way that even just standing there for a prolonged period of time doesn’t. There’s something about, you know when the animals gather to the water or whatever, this kind of experience where you’re just like, “All right, let’s just acknowledge together that we need sustenance.”
And somehow that kind of grounds us to, we’re just a bunch of descendants of apes here, just kind of grateful to be alive, frankly, and grateful to be consuming this thing which keeps us alive. And in that context, you can talk about all kinds of stuff. You can discuss flat earth and enjoy it.
Kimbal Musk
Absolutely. Absolutely. In fact, one of my favorite things to do is you do a Jeffersonian style dinner, let’s say five or six people. Sometimes people will break off into individual conversations. That’s actually when things break down. So that’s when you go back to small talk like, “Oh, I’m stuck next to this guy. I’m just going to do a little small talk.” What you need to do to really create a great conversation is one conversation at the table. And that’s where there’ll be some simple questions that I’ll say. I’ll say, “What’s your middle name?” And you’ll be amazed at the stories you get from that, but it’s about creating vulnerability.
Absolutely. Absolutely. In fact, one of my favorite things to do is you do a Jeffersonian style dinner, let’s say five or six people. Sometimes people will break off into individual conversations. That’s actually when things break down. So that’s when you go back to small talk like, “Oh, I’m stuck next to this guy. I’m just going to do a little small talk.” What you need to do to really create a great conversation is one conversation at the table. And that’s where there’ll be some simple questions that I’ll say. I’ll say, “What’s your middle name?” And you’ll be amazed at the stories you get from that, but it’s about creating vulnerability.
So, they’re like, “Oh, no one’s ever asked me that before,” so then they become vulnerable. And then it’s something as simple as, “What’s the most fun thing you’ve done recently and what is the most fun thing you’re looking forward to?” I have gotten into, with those prompts, I’ve gotten into hours long discussions on God. I’ve gotten into hours long discussions on love. I’ve got into hours long discussions on anger. It’s actually amazing when people are just asked a question, ” What’s the most fun thing you’ve done lately?” Well, why would anger come up? Well, actually, they’re in a vulnerable place, so it’ll just kind of come out of them.
Lex Fridman
So, you get to see this, you get to see this at the kitchen in you said Boulder, Denver, Chicago?
So, you get to see this, you get to see this at the kitchen in you said Boulder, Denver, Chicago?
Kimbal Musk
And we’re going to open in Austin.
And we’re going to open in Austin.
Lex Fridman
In Austin. That’s what I saw. When?
In Austin. That’s what I saw. When?
Kimbal Musk
In October is the goal.
In October is the goal.
Lex Fridman
In October is the goal. Well, I mean, speaking of characters and human beings, Austin is fascinating. I forget how long ago, a couple months ago, I was just sitting at a bar and the two people were talking and they were talking about Marxism, and it turns out that they’re a narco communists, which is the thing. And I got into this conversation.
In October is the goal. Well, I mean, speaking of characters and human beings, Austin is fascinating. I forget how long ago, a couple months ago, I was just sitting at a bar and the two people were talking and they were talking about Marxism, and it turns out that they’re a narco communists, which is the thing. And I got into this conversation.
Kimbal Musk
Communist likes drugs?
Communist likes drugs?
Lex Fridman
That’s a good question.
That’s a good question.
Kimbal Musk
I think I know some of those.
I think I know some of those.
Lex Fridman
Anyway, they were beautiful people. I think they’re local from Austin. I don’t know the depth of their personal experience of the different kinds of communists-like systems, but it was fascinating to listen to and then get to know them and the humanity, the weirdness, like the characters. I love it. One of the reasons I really love Austin, I decided to be here, is just the cliche thing of keep Austin weird. I mean, there’s a lot of weird characters.
Anyway, they were beautiful people. I think they’re local from Austin. I don’t know the depth of their personal experience of the different kinds of communists-like systems, but it was fascinating to listen to and then get to know them and the humanity, the weirdness, like the characters. I love it. One of the reasons I really love Austin, I decided to be here, is just the cliche thing of keep Austin weird. I mean, there’s a lot of weird characters.
Kimbal Musk
I love it. I think that I’ve talked to a lot Austinites who’ve been here forever, and I’m like, “Man, you got to hold us accountable. We got to keep this place weird.”
I love it. I think that I’ve talked to a lot Austinites who’ve been here forever, and I’m like, “Man, you got to hold us accountable. We got to keep this place weird.”
Lex Fridman
A hundred percent. Which makes the restaurant seem great because you have all these characters come in. It’s great, so I look forward to that. But you were saying you get to see humans in real life interact. That’s one of the beautiful things over food. In the book you write, Picasso once said, “The meaning of life is to find your gift. The purpose of life is to give it away.” Then you wrote that you believe food is the gift we give ourselves three times a day. Can you explain that? The gift nature of it.
A hundred percent. Which makes the restaurant seem great because you have all these characters come in. It’s great, so I look forward to that. But you were saying you get to see humans in real life interact. That’s one of the beautiful things over food. In the book you write, Picasso once said, “The meaning of life is to find your gift. The purpose of life is to give it away.” Then you wrote that you believe food is the gift we give ourselves three times a day. Can you explain that? The gift nature of it.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. I think it’s one of my most powerful life lessons is we have to eat. So, it’s not like you have a choice, you have to eat. And so what I choose to do is I choose to make it a gift to myself for each meal. And most of the time, the best gift is with friends, with family. We’ll have to cook some scrambled eggs in the morning with my daughter, or we’ll have dinner with our family. To me, it’s a gift we give ourselves three times a day at least, but for the most part, three times a day, let’s make it a good one.
Yeah. I think it’s one of my most powerful life lessons is we have to eat. So, it’s not like you have a choice, you have to eat. And so what I choose to do is I choose to make it a gift to myself for each meal. And most of the time, the best gift is with friends, with family. We’ll have to cook some scrambled eggs in the morning with my daughter, or we’ll have dinner with our family. To me, it’s a gift we give ourselves three times a day at least, but for the most part, three times a day, let’s make it a good one.
Lex Fridman
What makes it a good one to you? What aspect of what makes it a good one?
What makes it a good one to you? What aspect of what makes it a good one?
Kimbal Musk
Well, first definitely eating with people, so that makes it a good one. Eating in a restaurant, it doesn’t have to be my restaurant, where you have the energy of people around you, energy of the town, people you don’t know creates a little bit of a vibe. You mentioned the watering hole analogy that animals sipping at the water, but there’s an energy to that because they’re also looking around going, “Am I just about to be eaten?”
Well, first definitely eating with people, so that makes it a good one. Eating in a restaurant, it doesn’t have to be my restaurant, where you have the energy of people around you, energy of the town, people you don’t know creates a little bit of a vibe. You mentioned the watering hole analogy that animals sipping at the water, but there’s an energy to that because they’re also looking around going, “Am I just about to be eaten?”
So, they’re all in it together, we need to have water. But there’s still a little bit of tension as well in the background. And I think that’s what restaurants do is a very, very subtle version of that. You’re in a room with strangers and you’re a little cluster. Okay, fine, you guys are connected in it, but you’re in a room with strangers, and it’s just something that adds that energy to the meal.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You’re a little bit wondering what does everyone else think about our little cluster?
Yeah. You’re a little bit wondering what does everyone else think about our little cluster?
Kimbal Musk
Right. Are we too loud or just people are random, so something random could happen.
Right. Are we too loud or just people are random, so something random could happen.
Lex Fridman
And also depending on your personality, if you’re an extrovert, maybe you want to show off to the other clusters.
And also depending on your personality, if you’re an extrovert, maybe you want to show off to the other clusters.
Kimbal Musk
Exactly. Yeah, absolutely. Totally right. I mean, look at the cowboy hat. I mean, actually, I’ll take my hat off when I want to have a quiet meal and I can leave my hat on when I’m-
Exactly. Yeah, absolutely. Totally right. I mean, look at the cowboy hat. I mean, actually, I’ll take my hat off when I want to have a quiet meal and I can leave my hat on when I’m-
Lex Fridman
So you’re aware of [inaudible 00:26:23] of the hat.
So you’re aware of [inaudible 00:26:23] of the hat.
Kimbal Musk
I’m aware of the effect it has. Yeah, absolutely.
I’m aware of the effect it has. Yeah, absolutely.
Lex Fridman
Everyone turns [inaudible 00:26:27].
Everyone turns [inaudible 00:26:27].
Kimbal Musk
That’s right.
That’s right.
Lex Fridman
And then it’s back to the watering hole because when you wear a cowboy hat, you just might actually not-
And then it’s back to the watering hole because when you wear a cowboy hat, you just might actually not-
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. I’m like, they’re going to get me first.
Yeah. I’m like, they’re going to get me first.
Lex Fridman
At noon. I love it.
At noon. I love it.
Kimbal Musk
I got to tell the story. So, talk to the craziness of being in the restaurant world where you’re sitting at a table and anything can happen in the restaurant. So, this one time, it was like 15 years ago, this guy comes up to us and says, he’d like to propose to his wife, his girlfriend. And so we said, “Okay, cool. We’ve done this before. We’ll make sure it’s-
I got to tell the story. So, talk to the craziness of being in the restaurant world where you’re sitting at a table and anything can happen in the restaurant. So, this one time, it was like 15 years ago, this guy comes up to us and says, he’d like to propose to his wife, his girlfriend. And so we said, “Okay, cool. We’ve done this before. We’ll make sure it’s-
Kimbal Musk
And so we said, okay, cool. We’ve done this before. We’ll make sure it’s all set up, 6:00 PM reservation. So she shows up and we give her a glass of champagne and we obviously didn’t want to spoil the surprise so we just doing everything we can. But then he doesn’t arrive and they’re like, oh man. Now we’re like, don’t leave. Can we get you another glass of champagne? We’re doing everything we can because the guy was obviously earnest earlier, but just as he stuck in traffic or whatever and coming through the back door of the restaurant, which is you’re not allowed to come through the back door of the restaurant, a marching band from the school, the university comes through the restaurant full on brass band and the whole thing and he gets down and he proposes and it’s beautiful, sure, but it’s also like, man, this is chaos. This is insane. And we would never have said yes to this if he’d actually told us what he was going to do.
And so we said, okay, cool. We’ve done this before. We’ll make sure it’s all set up, 6:00 PM reservation. So she shows up and we give her a glass of champagne and we obviously didn’t want to spoil the surprise so we just doing everything we can. But then he doesn’t arrive and they’re like, oh man. Now we’re like, don’t leave. Can we get you another glass of champagne? We’re doing everything we can because the guy was obviously earnest earlier, but just as he stuck in traffic or whatever and coming through the back door of the restaurant, which is you’re not allowed to come through the back door of the restaurant, a marching band from the school, the university comes through the restaurant full on brass band and the whole thing and he gets down and he proposes and it’s beautiful, sure, but it’s also like, man, this is chaos. This is insane. And we would never have said yes to this if he’d actually told us what he was going to do.
Lex Fridman
Well sometimes in life you have to do it and apologize.
Well sometimes in life you have to do it and apologize.
Kimbal Musk
You do it and apologize. But that talks to that kind of what’s the crazy thing that could happen in a… It’s subtle, but it’s still there.
You do it and apologize. But that talks to that kind of what’s the crazy thing that could happen in a… It’s subtle, but it’s still there.
Lex Fridman
So in 2004 you opened The Kitchen. It’s an American bistro restaurant. What was it like? What’s it like running a restaurant? The good, the bad and the ugly. What’s the easy, what’s the fun and what’s the hard?
So in 2004 you opened The Kitchen. It’s an American bistro restaurant. What was it like? What’s it like running a restaurant? The good, the bad and the ugly. What’s the easy, what’s the fun and what’s the hard?
Kimbal Musk
I think the thing that I absolutely love about running the restaurant, not eating at it but running the restaurant is the tangible reaction from people. And you also kind of know when you screwed it up and you also know when you got it right. It’s kind of a weird way to say this, but even if the customer’s unhappy, you know whether you got it right or wrong. It’s not just about the food you’re making, but it’s about the person’s psychological state. And you’ll do something that you’d know that was not done well. And their psychological state, they’re just in a very happy place and they love it. And you’re like, huh, interesting. That’s not how I would’ve reacted to that dish. And then the other way around you’re like I got that right and that person’s just really unhappy today.
I think the thing that I absolutely love about running the restaurant, not eating at it but running the restaurant is the tangible reaction from people. And you also kind of know when you screwed it up and you also know when you got it right. It’s kind of a weird way to say this, but even if the customer’s unhappy, you know whether you got it right or wrong. It’s not just about the food you’re making, but it’s about the person’s psychological state. And you’ll do something that you’d know that was not done well. And their psychological state, they’re just in a very happy place and they love it. And you’re like, huh, interesting. That’s not how I would’ve reacted to that dish. And then the other way around you’re like I got that right and that person’s just really unhappy today.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. And it’s so hard to read humans because you have to… If you got it right, that can look a million different ways depending on the emotional rollercoaster that humans living through. I’ve been at some very low points and I’ve gone to a restaurant alone and just sitting there and be truly happy with just the zen aspect of it. And it was just a great steak or something like this and maybe two other people around me would look like I’m very unhappy just because I’m within myself.
Yeah. And it’s so hard to read humans because you have to… If you got it right, that can look a million different ways depending on the emotional rollercoaster that humans living through. I’ve been at some very low points and I’ve gone to a restaurant alone and just sitting there and be truly happy with just the zen aspect of it. And it was just a great steak or something like this and maybe two other people around me would look like I’m very unhappy just because I’m within myself.
Kimbal Musk
Sure, struggling with your today.
Sure, struggling with your today.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Within myself. But I’m truly happy within that struggle. So yeah, it’s interesting. But you can kind of tell.
Yeah. Within myself. But I’m truly happy within that struggle. So yeah, it’s interesting. But you can kind of tell.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, you can tell. And you mentioned being at the bar the most gifted bartenders really understand that. What’s also great about a restaurant it goes beyond the one-time experience that you walk in and you have that experience, is the good bartenders they remember you. Oh, you were in a few months ago and this is kind of your thing. You might need a little time. And other people will come in, they want a conversation or other people come in and they’re going through a divorce and they just want to be sad for a moment. Have a scotch. And it’s like, it’s amazing what you learn in the restaurant world to just be connected to humanity.
Yeah, you can tell. And you mentioned being at the bar the most gifted bartenders really understand that. What’s also great about a restaurant it goes beyond the one-time experience that you walk in and you have that experience, is the good bartenders they remember you. Oh, you were in a few months ago and this is kind of your thing. You might need a little time. And other people will come in, they want a conversation or other people come in and they’re going through a divorce and they just want to be sad for a moment. Have a scotch. And it’s like, it’s amazing what you learn in the restaurant world to just be connected to humanity.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. What is that about bars? That’s a different experience. You said the table, the communal.
Yeah. What is that about bars? That’s a different experience. You said the table, the communal.
Kimbal Musk
The table is when you connect with people, learn about each other. Bars, you can sometimes do that, you can talk left and right, but you have the freedom to always break free. You can say, okay great, I’m going to go back to my meal. It’s a friend you can turn on and off at any time because the bartender knows that. They’re trained. If you want attention, I’m going to give it to you. If you don’t, I’m going to stay away. If you want to be chatty, I’m going to be chatty. If you want to be completely in your head, I’ll leave you in your head.
The table is when you connect with people, learn about each other. Bars, you can sometimes do that, you can talk left and right, but you have the freedom to always break free. You can say, okay great, I’m going to go back to my meal. It’s a friend you can turn on and off at any time because the bartender knows that. They’re trained. If you want attention, I’m going to give it to you. If you don’t, I’m going to stay away. If you want to be chatty, I’m going to be chatty. If you want to be completely in your head, I’ll leave you in your head.
Lex Fridman
But there’s also strangers next to you that you… There’s a feeling with a bar that you’re kind of alone together.
But there’s also strangers next to you that you… There’s a feeling with a bar that you’re kind of alone together.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. And you can reach out, you can add some conversation or you can choose not to.
Yeah. And you can reach out, you can add some conversation or you can choose not to.
Lex Fridman
And you can exit quickly.
And you can exit quickly.
Kimbal Musk
You can exit. Exactly. It’s a really good exit. So bars are wonderful and I love going to a bar by myself after work. I might have a scotch, might even not even have alcohol, just have something and maybe I’ll have a snack or something before dinner because I’m going to go home and have dinner with the family and that 20 minutes is just an amazing state change from daytime to nighttime. Whereas if I went straight home, I’m still in my head and I’m just trying to get grounded and I’m not as pleasant of a person. So that’s another powerful use of a bar. It’s just like a transition time.
You can exit. Exactly. It’s a really good exit. So bars are wonderful and I love going to a bar by myself after work. I might have a scotch, might even not even have alcohol, just have something and maybe I’ll have a snack or something before dinner because I’m going to go home and have dinner with the family and that 20 minutes is just an amazing state change from daytime to nighttime. Whereas if I went straight home, I’m still in my head and I’m just trying to get grounded and I’m not as pleasant of a person. So that’s another powerful use of a bar. It’s just like a transition time.
Lex Fridman
Well, it would be remiss not to mention the other use of the bar, which is like when you’re going through some shit in life and you just go. I mean that’s the cliche thing, I’ve been somewhere-
Well, it would be remiss not to mention the other use of the bar, which is like when you’re going through some shit in life and you just go. I mean that’s the cliche thing, I’ve been somewhere-
Kimbal Musk
Drowning your sorrows.
Drowning your sorrows.
Lex Fridman
Exactly.
Exactly.
Kimbal Musk
The real thing.
The real thing.
Lex Fridman
Exactly. But the bar makes the melancholy somehow rich and beautiful and you feel heard in the silence.
Exactly. But the bar makes the melancholy somehow rich and beautiful and you feel heard in the silence.
Kimbal Musk
Yes. You feel heard. Like I said earlier, people going through a divorce, they don’t know where else to go. These are mostly men. Sometimes women will do it, but mostly men will do this and women have other ways of processing it. But they want a place to be sad and want a place where they could feel comfortable talking about it if… They’re certainly not going to go into too much detail, but they just want to say something and the bartender is there for them.
Yes. You feel heard. Like I said earlier, people going through a divorce, they don’t know where else to go. These are mostly men. Sometimes women will do it, but mostly men will do this and women have other ways of processing it. But they want a place to be sad and want a place where they could feel comfortable talking about it if… They’re certainly not going to go into too much detail, but they just want to say something and the bartender is there for them.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, you don’t know where to go.
Yeah, you don’t know where to go.
Kimbal Musk
You don’t know where to go. Exactly.
You don’t know where to go. Exactly.
Lex Fridman
And the bar… Yeah, you’re right. For men especially is a place to just go and just, I don’t know. What is that? What is that?
And the bar… Yeah, you’re right. For men especially is a place to just go and just, I don’t know. What is that? What is that?
Kimbal Musk
I’ll be honest, I still do it myself where if I’m at home and I don’t have a work thing that I got to deal with and I don’t have kids and I don’t have my wife or my family around, I don’t often cook for myself. I actually love going to a bar by myself. I have a glass of red wine and I usually don’t have a starter, appetizer. I just have a main meal and I just take in the energy of the space. It was my restaurant, someone else’s restaurant, I just take in the energy and it’s so much better than being home and turn the TV on. No, no, no. I want to be out in the restaurant. I want to feel the energy of the town. The other thing that restaurants teach me is they’re the front lines of the economy or what’s a better word for it? Front lines of the energy of how things are going.
I’ll be honest, I still do it myself where if I’m at home and I don’t have a work thing that I got to deal with and I don’t have kids and I don’t have my wife or my family around, I don’t often cook for myself. I actually love going to a bar by myself. I have a glass of red wine and I usually don’t have a starter, appetizer. I just have a main meal and I just take in the energy of the space. It was my restaurant, someone else’s restaurant, I just take in the energy and it’s so much better than being home and turn the TV on. No, no, no. I want to be out in the restaurant. I want to feel the energy of the town. The other thing that restaurants teach me is they’re the front lines of the economy or what’s a better word for it? Front lines of the energy of how things are going.
Lex Fridman
Of a people’s in general. It doesn’t necessarily mean this part of town, but it could be the entire society.
Of a people’s in general. It doesn’t necessarily mean this part of town, but it could be the entire society.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, exactly. So you can go into a restaurant and I’ll use a simple example and why is the restaurant empty? Ah, there’s a football game going on and there’s such a large number of people want to watch that game that the restaurant is quiet. Or it might be like another world series or something and you’re like, wow, that’s so interesting. You can actually watch in America, of course, American humanity, you can watch them move in their patterns just by being in the restaurant.
Yeah, exactly. So you can go into a restaurant and I’ll use a simple example and why is the restaurant empty? Ah, there’s a football game going on and there’s such a large number of people want to watch that game that the restaurant is quiet. Or it might be like another world series or something and you’re like, wow, that’s so interesting. You can actually watch in America, of course, American humanity, you can watch them move in their patterns just by being in the restaurant.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Kimbal Musk
And then another time you might be in a restaurant and he’s just jamming. It’s a Monday night and you’re like, what is the energy that created this on a Monday night and maybe even on a cold February, Monday night, what is it? And sometimes you can’t find out but you can feel it. And it’s my front lines of humanity that I also just really love about the restaurants.
And then another time you might be in a restaurant and he’s just jamming. It’s a Monday night and you’re like, what is the energy that created this on a Monday night and maybe even on a cold February, Monday night, what is it? And sometimes you can’t find out but you can feel it. And it’s my front lines of humanity that I also just really love about the restaurants.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it could be empty, it could be full. Empty bars, there’s a magic to those too.
Yeah, it could be empty, it could be full. Empty bars, there’s a magic to those too.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
You could still feel that energy. I don’t know.
You could still feel that energy. I don’t know.
Kimbal Musk
I actually prefer empty bars than full ones.
I actually prefer empty bars than full ones.
Lex Fridman
It’s just you and the bartender. I mean some of my greatest experiences is just the quiet bar, just me and the bartender and they’re doing their thing and they’ve seen so many… I’ve almost like through osmosis somehow feel the stories that that bartender has seen, has felt, has heard and all that kind of stuff. It’s not to be sort of spiritual about it, but it seems like it’s in the walls or something. Like there’s the history is felt.
It’s just you and the bartender. I mean some of my greatest experiences is just the quiet bar, just me and the bartender and they’re doing their thing and they’ve seen so many… I’ve almost like through osmosis somehow feel the stories that that bartender has seen, has felt, has heard and all that kind of stuff. It’s not to be sort of spiritual about it, but it seems like it’s in the walls or something. Like there’s the history is felt.
Kimbal Musk
And then some of these bars are actually very old and it’s wonderful. There are many in Europe like this, but there’s a couple in New York City, a few hundred years old and they’re still operating nonstop for that long and man, you feel it.
And then some of these bars are actually very old and it’s wonderful. There are many in Europe like this, but there’s a couple in New York City, a few hundred years old and they’re still operating nonstop for that long and man, you feel it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Let me ask you some questions about ingredients. What’s your favorite ingredient to cook with?
Yeah. Let me ask you some questions about ingredients. What’s your favorite ingredient to cook with?
Ingredients
Kimbal Musk
For me, cooking is an art. So it’d be like asking me what’s my favorite paint color to use. It’s not that it isn’t like there isn’t one, it’s more like when there is one, it really is one. There’s peaches on the cover of this cookbook. Those peaches, those were in August, Colorado peaches. It just doesn’t get any better than that.
For me, cooking is an art. So it’d be like asking me what’s my favorite paint color to use. It’s not that it isn’t like there isn’t one, it’s more like when there is one, it really is one. There’s peaches on the cover of this cookbook. Those peaches, those were in August, Colorado peaches. It just doesn’t get any better than that.
Lex Fridman
On that day, at that moment, that was the best.
On that day, at that moment, that was the best.
Kimbal Musk
That was the best, but that only lasts for a week and then they don’t taste so great.
That was the best, but that only lasts for a week and then they don’t taste so great.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Kimbal Musk
But damn are they so good in that moment and you just can’t stop wanting to use that ingredient.
But damn are they so good in that moment and you just can’t stop wanting to use that ingredient.
Lex Fridman
They look really good.
They look really good.
Kimbal Musk
They are so good.
They are so good.
Lex Fridman
What’s your favorite fruit? I love veggies and fruit. What’s your favorite fruit?
What’s your favorite fruit? I love veggies and fruit. What’s your favorite fruit?
Kimbal Musk
I love a smoothie bowl, so I do sort of berries, raspberries, but I use fruit more in the form of a smoothie bowl than I eat fruit that often. I like an apple or a banana, but for the most part, I prefer the blended.
I love a smoothie bowl, so I do sort of berries, raspberries, but I use fruit more in the form of a smoothie bowl than I eat fruit that often. I like an apple or a banana, but for the most part, I prefer the blended.
Lex Fridman
Not me. I love the way you casually said I like an apple.
Not me. I love the way you casually said I like an apple.
Kimbal Musk
A good apple is pretty great.
A good apple is pretty great.
Lex Fridman
For me it’s a problem, I think. Probably cherries number one. Probably, what are they called? Granny Smith apples number two.
For me it’s a problem, I think. Probably cherries number one. Probably, what are they called? Granny Smith apples number two.
Kimbal Musk
Oh, yeah, those are great. But try it when sometime come to Colorado in August and when you try those peaches, it is like it heaven has arrived in your mouth. It is so ridiculously good.
Oh, yeah, those are great. But try it when sometime come to Colorado in August and when you try those peaches, it is like it heaven has arrived in your mouth. It is so ridiculously good.
Lex Fridman
But just for a week in August.
But just for a week in August.
Kimbal Musk
Just for a week. You can’t have it all year long.
Just for a week. You can’t have it all year long.
Lex Fridman
Okay. What about veggies? You wrote that Chef Hugo that you worked with the co-founder of The Kitchen with taught you the power of a good vegetable.
Okay. What about veggies? You wrote that Chef Hugo that you worked with the co-founder of The Kitchen with taught you the power of a good vegetable.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
What’s the power of good vegetable?
What’s the power of good vegetable?
Kimbal Musk
So I’ve trained in New York as a French chef, but it wasn’t very much ingredients focused. It wasn’t very much sourcing focused. He came from the River Cafe in London, which was one of the OGs for the farm to table and still going strong today. And he taught me the value of getting to know farmers and getting to know vegetables from that farm versus vegetables from that farm. And they’re actually different. The soil’s a little different. The way they grow it a little different. It’s the opposite of the industrial machine where everything needs to look exactly the same. And sometimes you’ll get carrots that are ugly and deformed, but there’s much sweeter than the carrots you’d get for other purposes.
So I’ve trained in New York as a French chef, but it wasn’t very much ingredients focused. It wasn’t very much sourcing focused. He came from the River Cafe in London, which was one of the OGs for the farm to table and still going strong today. And he taught me the value of getting to know farmers and getting to know vegetables from that farm versus vegetables from that farm. And they’re actually different. The soil’s a little different. The way they grow it a little different. It’s the opposite of the industrial machine where everything needs to look exactly the same. And sometimes you’ll get carrots that are ugly and deformed, but there’s much sweeter than the carrots you’d get for other purposes.
So you’d make a carrot puree out of that and then you’d carrots that are more typical in shape and size, you might roast them for dinner. So it’s the appreciation for vegetables in general. I probably would say carrots is my favorite just because that was an example of one where I’ve really had to learn how to use the different types of carrots that come from all of our farms. And it’s fun. It’s a fun ingredient. If you just went to the whole foods or just went to a grocery store and you just got exactly the same carrot every time, less fun. But go to a farmer’s market and see what you get and you’ll see they’re quite different.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, carrot for me is probably number one. I have rigorous detailed rankings for fruit and veggies.
Yeah, carrot for me is probably number one. I have rigorous detailed rankings for fruit and veggies.
Kimbal Musk
That’s amazing.
That’s amazing.
Lex Fridman
But we’ll get into it. No, I’m just kidding. Well, I am the kind of person that would have a spreadsheet for that.
But we’ll get into it. No, I’m just kidding. Well, I am the kind of person that would have a spreadsheet for that.
Kimbal Musk
That’s great.
That’s great.
Lex Fridman
But I’m mostly just making fun of myself. But I do love carrots. I wish they weren’t so full of carbs, but…
But I’m mostly just making fun of myself. But I do love carrots. I wish they weren’t so full of carbs, but…
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, I’m just not anti carbs. I think the-
Yeah, I’m just not anti carbs. I think the-
Lex Fridman
Anti carb. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Anti carb. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. I think they play a role. I have a great friend who’s an amazing doctor and he did some tests for me and everything and turns out I have a gluten allergy and I was like, okay. So what that means is I shouldn’t eat gluten. It’s like, yeah. It’s like, okay, but I also have hay fever and that means I should not go out into nature. So I was like, nah, I think I’m going to go out into nature and maybe what I’ll do on bread and pasta is, like the true carbs I’ll just have it when it’s really good because when it’s really good, it’s really good and you don’t want to miss that. Most of the time, okay, find some crummy bread, whatever. I can skip that part, but I find all of these diets that are like, no, none of this will work. Super this, super that. I wonder if they’re just like people are just looking for something to hang on to. But these diets have been around forever and if they work, then we would know that.
Yeah. I think they play a role. I have a great friend who’s an amazing doctor and he did some tests for me and everything and turns out I have a gluten allergy and I was like, okay. So what that means is I shouldn’t eat gluten. It’s like, yeah. It’s like, okay, but I also have hay fever and that means I should not go out into nature. So I was like, nah, I think I’m going to go out into nature and maybe what I’ll do on bread and pasta is, like the true carbs I’ll just have it when it’s really good because when it’s really good, it’s really good and you don’t want to miss that. Most of the time, okay, find some crummy bread, whatever. I can skip that part, but I find all of these diets that are like, no, none of this will work. Super this, super that. I wonder if they’re just like people are just looking for something to hang on to. But these diets have been around forever and if they work, then we would know that.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I think one of the biggest problems with diets is it adds stress when you do have that perfect bowl of pasta. If you have categorized yourself as a low-carb eating person, you might be very stressed about enjoying this thing when you should just let go.
Yeah, I think one of the biggest problems with diets is it adds stress when you do have that perfect bowl of pasta. If you have categorized yourself as a low-carb eating person, you might be very stressed about enjoying this thing when you should just let go.
Kimbal Musk
Let go. This is your cheat day or whatever. And I’ve heard that, and actually I have friends who do that their cheat day, and I say to them, I’m only going to hang out with you on your cheat day because that’s when you’re actually fun.
Let go. This is your cheat day or whatever. And I’ve heard that, and actually I have friends who do that their cheat day, and I say to them, I’m only going to hang out with you on your cheat day because that’s when you’re actually fun.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I would say for me there’s things that make me feel really good, but they’re not rules. They’re not… They’re like go-to favorites in terms of diet and so on. For example, I’ve mostly been eating once a day for the longest time, but that’s not a rule. It’s completely flexible and I’ve mostly been eating very low-carb.
Yeah. I would say for me there’s things that make me feel really good, but they’re not rules. They’re not… They’re like go-to favorites in terms of diet and so on. For example, I’ve mostly been eating once a day for the longest time, but that’s not a rule. It’s completely flexible and I’ve mostly been eating very low-carb.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, but you must be eating a lot of food in that one meal.
Yeah, but you must be eating a lot of food in that one meal.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, because it’s usually a very sort of meat heavy. It’s not, portions are not that big.
Yeah, because it’s usually a very sort of meat heavy. It’s not, portions are not that big.
Kimbal Musk
Sure, but your body needs food.
Sure, but your body needs food.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, body needs food. So you’re talking about like 2000 calories. What you find out is that dinner is the most social time of the day.
Yeah, body needs food. So you’re talking about like 2000 calories. What you find out is that dinner is the most social time of the day.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. I have kids in the mornings, so if you have kids, it’s for sure a morning experience, but if you don’t, then you’re right.
Yeah. I have kids in the mornings, so if you have kids, it’s for sure a morning experience, but if you don’t, then you’re right.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. But like you said, I deviate. I’m more afraid of missing the perfect dessert, the perfect breakfast, the perfect bowl of pasta, pizza, all that kind of stuff. I don’t think of it as a cheat day. I think it’s a-
Yeah. But like you said, I deviate. I’m more afraid of missing the perfect dessert, the perfect breakfast, the perfect bowl of pasta, pizza, all that kind of stuff. I don’t think of it as a cheat day. I think it’s a-
Kimbal Musk
Well, of you only doing one meal a day, you can eat whatever you like.
Well, of you only doing one meal a day, you can eat whatever you like.
Lex Fridman
But I want to make clear that it’s not one meal a day always, and I’m like this very strict thing. You always have to be open to the experience, to the new experience.
But I want to make clear that it’s not one meal a day always, and I’m like this very strict thing. You always have to be open to the experience, to the new experience.
Kimbal Musk
I love that. Yeah.
I love that. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Otherwise you do miss out, just like you said, hay fever. I think if you want to be really safe, you should never leave your home.
Otherwise you do miss out, just like you said, hay fever. I think if you want to be really safe, you should never leave your home.
Kimbal Musk
Yes. Right we learned during COVID, if you wrap yourself in cotton wool in your basement-
Yes. Right we learned during COVID, if you wrap yourself in cotton wool in your basement-
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Kimbal Musk
… you’re not going to die from COVID. You might die from a lot of other things, of pure misery.
… you’re not going to die from COVID. You might die from a lot of other things, of pure misery.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Well, you might live forever.
Yeah. Well, you might live forever.
Kimbal Musk
We don’t know.
We don’t know.
Lex Fridman
But it certainly doesn’t maximize the joy of whatever makes life worth living, it doesn’t maximize that.
But it certainly doesn’t maximize the joy of whatever makes life worth living, it doesn’t maximize that.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. Exactly.
Yeah. Exactly.
Anthony Bourdain
Lex Fridman
You wrote in the book that Anthony Bourdain was one of your heroes. Can you speak to what inspired you about him?
You wrote in the book that Anthony Bourdain was one of your heroes. Can you speak to what inspired you about him?
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, he wrote a book called Kitchen Confidential in the nineties. I was in cooking school at the time. It was so… He romanticized the cooking in the restaurant so well. His writing is great. He kind of got me into like, oh, that’s cool, I want to do that. It was cool. So I got into cooking school, got more engaged in it, and I had this FOMO feeling of I wanted to experience what it’s like to be in the back. When you’re in cooking school, you are in the back. It had a restaurant, we would serve people, but it’s not the same thing as actually being in a… A real restaurant it’s like you’re in a submarine with your teammates and you got to win tonight. It’s a real energy. And so that was a big inspiration. I followed him over the… It’s so sad that he chose to end his life, but I also had met with him a few times. Not like one-on-one over dinner or anything, but just met with him and I just felt his love for food and truly just love for food.
Yeah, he wrote a book called Kitchen Confidential in the nineties. I was in cooking school at the time. It was so… He romanticized the cooking in the restaurant so well. His writing is great. He kind of got me into like, oh, that’s cool, I want to do that. It was cool. So I got into cooking school, got more engaged in it, and I had this FOMO feeling of I wanted to experience what it’s like to be in the back. When you’re in cooking school, you are in the back. It had a restaurant, we would serve people, but it’s not the same thing as actually being in a… A real restaurant it’s like you’re in a submarine with your teammates and you got to win tonight. It’s a real energy. And so that was a big inspiration. I followed him over the… It’s so sad that he chose to end his life, but I also had met with him a few times. Not like one-on-one over dinner or anything, but just met with him and I just felt his love for food and truly just love for food.
Lex Fridman
He gave the advice of don’t be afraid, get excited, and cook with love.
He gave the advice of don’t be afraid, get excited, and cook with love.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. I’ve used that phrase, especially the cook loved one. One of the things about which we talked about this earlier, where you get quick tangible feedback from a customer when you’re in the restaurant. I know when I didn’t put love into that dish. I know when one of my line cooks did not put love into that part of the dish. I know when that expert person did not put love into double checking the dish before putting it on the table. You just know and cook with love is you do it for your family. Oh, actually, especially when you do it for your family. The food doesn’t have to be perfect, but you’re cooking with love.
Yeah. I’ve used that phrase, especially the cook loved one. One of the things about which we talked about this earlier, where you get quick tangible feedback from a customer when you’re in the restaurant. I know when I didn’t put love into that dish. I know when one of my line cooks did not put love into that part of the dish. I know when that expert person did not put love into double checking the dish before putting it on the table. You just know and cook with love is you do it for your family. Oh, actually, especially when you do it for your family. The food doesn’t have to be perfect, but you’re cooking with love.
Lex Fridman
That’s why you lost scrambled eggs.
That’s why you lost scrambled eggs.
Kimbal Musk
I do that, it’s-
I do that, it’s-
Lex Fridman
That’s in the book, Kimbal’s scrambled eggs.
That’s in the book, Kimbal’s scrambled eggs.
Kimbal Musk
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
You promised to make me scrambled eggs, I’m going to hold you to it.
You promised to make me scrambled eggs, I’m going to hold you to it.
Kimbal Musk
That’s great.
That’s great.
Cooking school
Lex Fridman
A cooking school you mentioned, The French Culinary Institute. I heard it was a bit of a rough experience in parts.
A cooking school you mentioned, The French Culinary Institute. I heard it was a bit of a rough experience in parts.
Kimbal Musk
I will call it… It’s not a rough experience in that-
I will call it… It’s not a rough experience in that-
Lex Fridman
In a beautiful way.
In a beautiful way.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, it’s exactly. It’s not like I’m a victim of it. It’s rough in that they intentionally make it rough. So the school costs the same price as Harvard to go to. You show up, it’s an 18 month program. You are allowed to drop out at any time. You don’t get your money back. 25 people started, six people graduated, and the people who graduated, I graduated, but man, there were times where I’m like, I can’t handle this. I would literally say to my friends, “Oh, I got to go to cooking school. I’m going to go get screamed at for the next six or seven hours.” And I had this little French chef who was my nemesis.
Yeah, it’s exactly. It’s not like I’m a victim of it. It’s rough in that they intentionally make it rough. So the school costs the same price as Harvard to go to. You show up, it’s an 18 month program. You are allowed to drop out at any time. You don’t get your money back. 25 people started, six people graduated, and the people who graduated, I graduated, but man, there were times where I’m like, I can’t handle this. I would literally say to my friends, “Oh, I got to go to cooking school. I’m going to go get screamed at for the next six or seven hours.” And I had this little French chef who was my nemesis.
Lex Fridman
Does he still live in your head somewhere?
Does he still live in your head somewhere?
Kimbal Musk
He still lives in my head. Exactly. He totally does. He’s like five foot two or something. And I remember him screaming so much at me that… He’s like the short guy. I’m six five. The spittle would land on my face.
He still lives in my head. Exactly. He totally does. He’s like five foot two or something. And I remember him screaming so much at me that… He’s like the short guy. I’m six five. The spittle would land on my face.
Lex Fridman
Nice.
Nice.
Kimbal Musk
And I would just have to stand there and take it. It was a very humbling experience. I did learn though that it’s intentionally rough. So it took a little bit of the edge off it. One day when that same chef had come over to me and said, move over a little bit, and I moved over and he took my carrots, whatever, and started just chopping everything, perfectly. And then he said, okay, you can come back. And then he went over to someone else and started screaming at them saying that, look, even Kimbal can do this and you can’t do this. And I was like, this whole thing’s like a psycho game. So it did take the edge off when I realized it was… The guy was intentionally trying to break you down. And they do this apparently in the army. I’ve not been to the army, but they need to break you down. Everything you know is worthless so that then we can teach you and you can come out of it with what actually we want you to know.
And I would just have to stand there and take it. It was a very humbling experience. I did learn though that it’s intentionally rough. So it took a little bit of the edge off it. One day when that same chef had come over to me and said, move over a little bit, and I moved over and he took my carrots, whatever, and started just chopping everything, perfectly. And then he said, okay, you can come back. And then he went over to someone else and started screaming at them saying that, look, even Kimbal can do this and you can’t do this. And I was like, this whole thing’s like a psycho game. So it did take the edge off when I realized it was… The guy was intentionally trying to break you down. And they do this apparently in the army. I’ve not been to the army, but they need to break you down. Everything you know is worthless so that then we can teach you and you can come out of it with what actually we want you to know.
Lex Fridman
Are there specific technical lessons you remember you learned from that, sort of how to cut carrots or how to approach food, how to prepare food, how to think about food, how to carry yourself in the kitchen?
Are there specific technical lessons you remember you learned from that, sort of how to cut carrots or how to approach food, how to prepare food, how to think about food, how to carry yourself in the kitchen?
Kimbal Musk
All of those things. I think that one of the most beautiful lessons was actually scrambled eggs. So there’s different layers of chefs. So they’re all master chefs. They’re all very well-known people and everything, but Alain Sailhac was one of the chief main main guys, and he just passed away, master chef, and everything kind of stopped when he would show up in the kitchen and he would teach very few things. And all of the other chefs, the same ones that were screaming at us, just like, it was like the Red Sea parting.
All of those things. I think that one of the most beautiful lessons was actually scrambled eggs. So there’s different layers of chefs. So they’re all master chefs. They’re all very well-known people and everything, but Alain Sailhac was one of the chief main main guys, and he just passed away, master chef, and everything kind of stopped when he would show up in the kitchen and he would teach very few things. And all of the other chefs, the same ones that were screaming at us, just like, it was like the Red Sea parting.
They have total respect for this human and he can do whatever he wants. And one of the things he wanted to teach was how do you make an omelet, a French omelet, and it’s really fundamentally the same thing. It’s a soft scrambled eggs that you fold and the love that he put into the time with us. And of course he’s a legend. There were moments like that where I’m like, wow, okay. Also, just like the other chefs, he didn’t have any concern berating anyone. So he berated our master chefs saying, “I don’t trust these people to teach you how to make scrambled eggs, so I’m going to do it instead.”
Lex Fridman
Can you speak to that? Because a lot of people here in this would be like scrambled eggs. Why do you need to be a master chef to really make scrambled eggs?
Can you speak to that? Because a lot of people here in this would be like scrambled eggs. Why do you need to be a master chef to really make scrambled eggs?
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. Well, first of all, for me, and it’s a learning journey forever. So I make scrambled eggs. I must have made it 10,000 times or more, whatever.
Yeah. Well, first of all, for me, and it’s a learning journey forever. So I make scrambled eggs. I must have made it 10,000 times or more, whatever.
Lex Fridman
So it’s like Jared dreams of sushi, Kimbal dreams of scrambled eggs.
So it’s like Jared dreams of sushi, Kimbal dreams of scrambled eggs.
Kimbal Musk
Pretty much.
Pretty much.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Kimbal Musk
So I will wake up and be held accountable by my kids to make scrambled eggs. So this happens every morning and I know all the steps, muscle memory level kind of steps, how well I know it, and then I’ll cook it. And it’s very meditative for me because you have to focus. So most scrambled eggs, soft scrambled egg recipes are 10, 15 minutes to get them to that perfect softness. And the recipe that I got from Chef Alain was something that you do in 90 seconds, but it requires total focus. If you look up for a second, you’re going to miss the perfect moment where you have to stop and get those eggs out of the pan because the eggs will keep cooking. And so it’s this meditation. And sometimes you hit it perfectly, but most times could have been a little softer, could have been a little firmer, could have been a little bit more salt, could have been a little bit of pepper. And so what’s really fun about the morning is my kids are kind of into it so we critique the eggs every morning.
So I will wake up and be held accountable by my kids to make scrambled eggs. So this happens every morning and I know all the steps, muscle memory level kind of steps, how well I know it, and then I’ll cook it. And it’s very meditative for me because you have to focus. So most scrambled eggs, soft scrambled egg recipes are 10, 15 minutes to get them to that perfect softness. And the recipe that I got from Chef Alain was something that you do in 90 seconds, but it requires total focus. If you look up for a second, you’re going to miss the perfect moment where you have to stop and get those eggs out of the pan because the eggs will keep cooking. And so it’s this meditation. And sometimes you hit it perfectly, but most times could have been a little softer, could have been a little firmer, could have been a little bit more salt, could have been a little bit of pepper. And so what’s really fun about the morning is my kids are kind of into it so we critique the eggs every morning.
Lex Fridman
Do they have a rating system? We’re back to the spreadsheet.
Do they have a rating system? We’re back to the spreadsheet.
Kimbal Musk
It’s more like, and again, it also comes back to how do people feel. So my kids can be in a bad mood and they can be grumpy.
It’s more like, and again, it also comes back to how do people feel. So my kids can be in a bad mood and they can be grumpy.
Lex Fridman
Or it’s like a Michelin star system. What?
Or it’s like a Michelin star system. What?
Kimbal Musk
No, no. It’s more like, oh yeah, I like my eggs a little more gooier or yesterday it was this way, but a little bit more salt, a little less salt. Salt is usually the one that is… Because not all salts are equal. So if you are used to working with a certain kind of salt and then you just are forced for some reason to… You ran out of salt so you use some other salt, you actually don’t know how to use it. You really want to have the same salt all the time.
No, no. It’s more like, oh yeah, I like my eggs a little more gooier or yesterday it was this way, but a little bit more salt, a little less salt. Salt is usually the one that is… Because not all salts are equal. So if you are used to working with a certain kind of salt and then you just are forced for some reason to… You ran out of salt so you use some other salt, you actually don’t know how to use it. You really want to have the same salt all the time.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. You have a page on salt in the book, which is fascinating.
Yeah. You have a page on salt in the book, which is fascinating.
Kimbal Musk
Totally. Salt is you got to get to know your salt, you got to love your salt, and you got to use it over and over and over again. And it will teach you how to use that salt, whereby your own palate will tell you how salty you like things. But if you change it up and you mix up a whole bunch of salts, you’ve now multiplied your learning path. So for me, my favorite salt is kosher salt. And I like to use that all the time. And if I ever change it, I might sprinkle a little bit of Maldon salt, just a crunchy sort of a flaky salt. But it’s more for that when you’re actually eating.
Totally. Salt is you got to get to know your salt, you got to love your salt, and you got to use it over and over and over again. And it will teach you how to use that salt, whereby your own palate will tell you how salty you like things. But if you change it up and you mix up a whole bunch of salts, you’ve now multiplied your learning path. So for me, my favorite salt is kosher salt. And I like to use that all the time. And if I ever change it, I might sprinkle a little bit of Maldon salt, just a crunchy sort of a flaky salt. But it’s more for that when you’re actually eating.
Lex Fridman
For the texture.
For the texture.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, it gives you texture as well as salt. Exactly. You wouldn’t use it on scrambled eggs, but if you switch out your salts, it’s a different weapon.
Yeah, it gives you texture as well as salt. Exactly. You wouldn’t use it on scrambled eggs, but if you switch out your salts, it’s a different weapon.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah.
Kimbal Musk
You need to learn it.
You need to learn it.
Lex Fridman
I like how usually there’s wine connoisseurs. You’re saying going back to farm to table when you’re talking about carrots, in that same rigor and nuance you have to consider the different farms involved for the carrots, in that same way you have to consider the different salts with like-
I like how usually there’s wine connoisseurs. You’re saying going back to farm to table when you’re talking about carrots, in that same rigor and nuance you have to consider the different farms involved for the carrots, in that same way you have to consider the different salts with like-
Kimbal Musk
And also not even all kosher salts are the same. It’s the particular salt that you like, get to know it, get in a relationship with it. It’s like great. You’ll learn so much.
And also not even all kosher salts are the same. It’s the particular salt that you like, get to know it, get in a relationship with it. It’s like great. You’ll learn so much.
Lex Fridman
In terms of the measurement, the proportion, the amount you put of salt you put in, are you doing that exactly, or are you doing it by feel.
In terms of the measurement, the proportion, the amount you put of salt you put in, are you doing that exactly, or are you doing it by feel.
Kimbal Musk
So it’s by feel, and that’s where you get the relationship. So in fact, in the cookbook, I have QR codes that people can scan because what I struggle with is they don’t teach you technique. They can describe the technique, but they don’t teach the technique because it’s a technique, it’s not a recipe. And so one of the lessons is how do you salt a steak. And the answer is not here’s a teaspoon and you do it this way. The answer is use kosher salts-
So it’s by feel, and that’s where you get the relationship. So in fact, in the cookbook, I have QR codes that people can scan because what I struggle with is they don’t teach you technique. They can describe the technique, but they don’t teach the technique because it’s a technique, it’s not a recipe. And so one of the lessons is how do you salt a steak. And the answer is not here’s a teaspoon and you do it this way. The answer is use kosher salts-
Kimbal Musk
The answer is use kosher salt so you can see with your eyes, because they’re little flakes, how much salt is on your steak, cook it and then taste it. Do you think you need more or do you need it less? Okay, now next time put a little more on it because you can see it. And it’s about learning the fact that you want to be able to see how much salt is on the steak so that you can then train yourself for the future of how much salt you want on your steak.
The answer is use kosher salt so you can see with your eyes, because they’re little flakes, how much salt is on your steak, cook it and then taste it. Do you think you need more or do you need it less? Okay, now next time put a little more on it because you can see it. And it’s about learning the fact that you want to be able to see how much salt is on the steak so that you can then train yourself for the future of how much salt you want on your steak.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. But then the steak and the salt kind of dance together. It depends on where the steak came from.
Yeah. But then the steak and the salt kind of dance together. It depends on where the steak came from.
Kimbal Musk
That’s true. Or the thickness of the steak, that’ll make a difference. But for the most part, if you’re able to see it versus table salt, for example, just disappears, you just can’t see what you’re putting on your steak. You can’t really learn as a result.
That’s true. Or the thickness of the steak, that’ll make a difference. But for the most part, if you’re able to see it versus table salt, for example, just disappears, you just can’t see what you’re putting on your steak. You can’t really learn as a result.
Lex Fridman
I think you talk about roast chickens where your love of food began. What about steak?
I think you talk about roast chickens where your love of food began. What about steak?
Kimbal Musk
I love a good steak. It’s so great.
I love a good steak. It’s so great.
Lex Fridman
So in the French school, you add sauces and all this kind of stuff, and in Boulder is when you realized there’s a beauty to the basic ingredient.
So in the French school, you add sauces and all this kind of stuff, and in Boulder is when you realized there’s a beauty to the basic ingredient.
Kimbal Musk
Simplicity, yeah, a good New York strip from a good rancher. There’s a lot of discussion and controversy on how cattle should be raised, and we have a very different approach, which is, we know how our cattle are raised. We go to the farm, we get to know the rancher. And sometimes you do want to have them be finished on, they’ll be grass-fed for the most part, but then there’s some sort of cool recipe of food you’re giving them that will then make them taste better. And sometimes it is actually pretty good to have 100% grass fed. I’ve had some amazing ranchers that show me that the flavor is all there. For the average person that might go to Whole Foods or a grocery store, I think the simplicity of a good steak, it is important to get good sourcing, but also it’s just good.
Simplicity, yeah, a good New York strip from a good rancher. There’s a lot of discussion and controversy on how cattle should be raised, and we have a very different approach, which is, we know how our cattle are raised. We go to the farm, we get to know the rancher. And sometimes you do want to have them be finished on, they’ll be grass-fed for the most part, but then there’s some sort of cool recipe of food you’re giving them that will then make them taste better. And sometimes it is actually pretty good to have 100% grass fed. I’ve had some amazing ranchers that show me that the flavor is all there. For the average person that might go to Whole Foods or a grocery store, I think the simplicity of a good steak, it is important to get good sourcing, but also it’s just good.
Lex Fridman
What’s your favorite kind of meat? Is it New York Strip? It’s probably New York Strip for me.
What’s your favorite kind of meat? Is it New York Strip? It’s probably New York Strip for me.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. New York Strip. I like the fact that it’s lean, but if you want the fat, you can dive into that little strip of fat or you can leave it alone because you don’t want it that night. It’s also a great steak for adding something, if you want. You could either do a pepper sauce or you could do a lot of ground pepper, which it’s not sauce, but it’s a peppery steak. It’s a really good steak for a canvas for other things.
Yeah. New York Strip. I like the fact that it’s lean, but if you want the fat, you can dive into that little strip of fat or you can leave it alone because you don’t want it that night. It’s also a great steak for adding something, if you want. You could either do a pepper sauce or you could do a lot of ground pepper, which it’s not sauce, but it’s a peppery steak. It’s a really good steak for a canvas for other things.
Lex Fridman
But the basic ingredients you’re playing with are salt and pepper?
But the basic ingredients you’re playing with are salt and pepper?
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, pretty much. Actually, I will say there’s another one, garlic. This is my favorite recipe for a steak. You season it, both sides salt and pepper. You saute it in a little olive oil, barely anything, and you’re getting a nice crisp, a golden dark, golden brown on both sides. The other trick with cooking a steak is don’t touch it. You just put one side when you’re ready to turn it, turn it around. Don’t touch it any other time. But at the end, you take a dab of butter and you crush a clove of garlic. You don’t even chop it, you just crush the clove, and you put the two of them in the pan and you just roll the steak around in the garlic butter. I think that’s the one.
Yeah, pretty much. Actually, I will say there’s another one, garlic. This is my favorite recipe for a steak. You season it, both sides salt and pepper. You saute it in a little olive oil, barely anything, and you’re getting a nice crisp, a golden dark, golden brown on both sides. The other trick with cooking a steak is don’t touch it. You just put one side when you’re ready to turn it, turn it around. Don’t touch it any other time. But at the end, you take a dab of butter and you crush a clove of garlic. You don’t even chop it, you just crush the clove, and you put the two of them in the pan and you just roll the steak around in the garlic butter. I think that’s the one.
Lex Fridman
Bold move, bold move. Since you’re in Austin quite a bit opening a restaurant here, what do you think about barbecue? It’s the Texas way.
Bold move, bold move. Since you’re in Austin quite a bit opening a restaurant here, what do you think about barbecue? It’s the Texas way.
Kimbal Musk
Well, I would say there’s an Austin way.
Well, I would say there’s an Austin way.
Lex Fridman
There’s an Austin way.
There’s an Austin way.
Kimbal Musk
And actually even Austin would say, “There’s a suburb of Austin way.” I think that actually the adventure of food is wonderful. I would absolutely say that Austin is one of the great food cities of America, and barbecue is one of its gifts that it gives the city. But you go to one and the other and you’ll have a different approach, and that’s the part I love is where the real celebration of the art is in. So you might go to one, and they have a style that they love and they’ve been doing it for years, and then you’ll go to another and they have a style that they love and they’ve been doing it for years. They’re still barbecue, but they’re actually different. And it’s really beautiful to see that. I think that’s what food culture is. It just builds up over time by people who love this style of cooking.
And actually even Austin would say, “There’s a suburb of Austin way.” I think that actually the adventure of food is wonderful. I would absolutely say that Austin is one of the great food cities of America, and barbecue is one of its gifts that it gives the city. But you go to one and the other and you’ll have a different approach, and that’s the part I love is where the real celebration of the art is in. So you might go to one, and they have a style that they love and they’ve been doing it for years, and then you’ll go to another and they have a style that they love and they’ve been doing it for years. They’re still barbecue, but they’re actually different. And it’s really beautiful to see that. I think that’s what food culture is. It just builds up over time by people who love this style of cooking.
Lex Fridman
Well, I especially love the communal, how they structure restaurants usually. I don’t even want to call it a restaurant because it doesn’t feel like a restaurant. It feels like a tavern of some sort. Terry Black’s was like that.
Well, I especially love the communal, how they structure restaurants usually. I don’t even want to call it a restaurant because it doesn’t feel like a restaurant. It feels like a tavern of some sort. Terry Black’s was like that.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. They also have paper towels. You can get as messy as you like. And it’s a whole roll of paper towels. They don’t just give you a napkin. They know what you’re getting into.
Yeah. They also have paper towels. You can get as messy as you like. And it’s a whole roll of paper towels. They don’t just give you a napkin. They know what you’re getting into.
Lex Fridman
There’s just wood everywhere and it has this feel like this place has been around forever. It’s not changing. I know it’s the 21st century with the internet and all this nonsense that you people are building, but really this is all about the same. It’s been the same for generations. We’re doing it the same. That kind of feel, if you want to escape the world in that way and then truly connect with people.
There’s just wood everywhere and it has this feel like this place has been around forever. It’s not changing. I know it’s the 21st century with the internet and all this nonsense that you people are building, but really this is all about the same. It’s been the same for generations. We’re doing it the same. That kind of feel, if you want to escape the world in that way and then truly connect with people.
Kimbal Musk
One of the other things that’ll happen in a town like Austin is there’ll be a barbecue joint that is just legendary, and then out of that will come someone who wants to go do their own barbecue joint and they’ll take the learning from that barbecue joint, they’ll open up a new one, but it won’t be the same as the other barbecue joint. Part of it says, “Dude, don’t just do the same thing. Do something. What you have to say?” But also part of it is, if you’re in the world of food as an art form and you want to go open up another barbecue joint, you want to prove yourself. “I deserve to have a barbecue joint in this town. I know this is one of the holy grails of barbecue.” And people will follow you like they’re following a musician or they’re following an artist and they are excited to see what your version is and how well you can pull it off. But that’s what I love. That’s what I mean by a city with a food culture. Austin has that.
One of the other things that’ll happen in a town like Austin is there’ll be a barbecue joint that is just legendary, and then out of that will come someone who wants to go do their own barbecue joint and they’ll take the learning from that barbecue joint, they’ll open up a new one, but it won’t be the same as the other barbecue joint. Part of it says, “Dude, don’t just do the same thing. Do something. What you have to say?” But also part of it is, if you’re in the world of food as an art form and you want to go open up another barbecue joint, you want to prove yourself. “I deserve to have a barbecue joint in this town. I know this is one of the holy grails of barbecue.” And people will follow you like they’re following a musician or they’re following an artist and they are excited to see what your version is and how well you can pull it off. But that’s what I love. That’s what I mean by a city with a food culture. Austin has that.
Lex Fridman
There’s also a legend to certain places. Certain places are more than just the food they create. That could be a burden. You have to live up to the legendary nature of the name.
There’s also a legend to certain places. Certain places are more than just the food they create. That could be a burden. You have to live up to the legendary nature of the name.
Kimbal Musk
Our restaurant in Boulder, The Kitchen, is 20 years old. We’re very well known, very well respected, and we do have to live up to the name. I think that our restaurant lives up to its name in not just the food. It’s like you walk in and you feel the restaurant. And that is also something we’ve just done naturally. The space is 120 year old building. It used to be a brothel. It was a bookstore, a storied history.
Our restaurant in Boulder, The Kitchen, is 20 years old. We’re very well known, very well respected, and we do have to live up to the name. I think that our restaurant lives up to its name in not just the food. It’s like you walk in and you feel the restaurant. And that is also something we’ve just done naturally. The space is 120 year old building. It used to be a brothel. It was a bookstore, a storied history.
Lex Fridman
That’s an interesting take.
That’s an interesting take.
Kimbal Musk
Literally, this was a mining town. So back in the 1800s, this was built late 1800s, brothels were all over. That was a thing. And so there’s an actual tunnel in the basement that goes to the local hotel that would be used for going back and forth between the hotel and the brothel without people knowing. The tunnel is now concreted up, but you can go about 20, 30 feet into the tunnel. You go into the space and it’s actually an old space, so you feel like it’s been there forever.
Literally, this was a mining town. So back in the 1800s, this was built late 1800s, brothels were all over. That was a thing. And so there’s an actual tunnel in the basement that goes to the local hotel that would be used for going back and forth between the hotel and the brothel without people knowing. The tunnel is now concreted up, but you can go about 20, 30 feet into the tunnel. You go into the space and it’s actually an old space, so you feel like it’s been there forever.
Life-threatening accident
Lex Fridman
In 2010, you had a life-threatening accident that changed the way you see life, the world, also the way you see food and cooking. Can you tell me the story of it?
In 2010, you had a life-threatening accident that changed the way you see life, the world, also the way you see food and cooking. Can you tell me the story of it?
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. So 2010, I was 37. I had opened the restaurant in 2004, and I had loved the restaurant world, loved it, but I didn’t really want to grow a restaurant company. That wasn’t my goal. And so I went back into technology and I had gone from something that I love to something that I like. For me, it was like chewing sawdust every day. I just couldn’t believe that I had changed my life and had gone back into technology. And then now I do, do work in technology and I do love it, but I found a better relationship with it. But I was really unhappy. From the outside, I was a CEO of a hot startup, but from the inside I was just very unhappy. And I was in Jackson Hole and I was doing these very aggressive snowboard runs and I’m at the time a pretty good, aggressive snowboarder. And I remember saying to myself, “Look, I’ve got kids. I need to chill on this.”
Yeah. So 2010, I was 37. I had opened the restaurant in 2004, and I had loved the restaurant world, loved it, but I didn’t really want to grow a restaurant company. That wasn’t my goal. And so I went back into technology and I had gone from something that I love to something that I like. For me, it was like chewing sawdust every day. I just couldn’t believe that I had changed my life and had gone back into technology. And then now I do, do work in technology and I do love it, but I found a better relationship with it. But I was really unhappy. From the outside, I was a CEO of a hot startup, but from the inside I was just very unhappy. And I was in Jackson Hole and I was doing these very aggressive snowboard runs and I’m at the time a pretty good, aggressive snowboarder. And I remember saying to myself, “Look, I’ve got kids. I need to chill on this.”
The next day, it was Valentine’s Day. Tomorrow’s Valentine’s Day. I’m just going to have a nice day with the family and my wife at the time. And we went to a children’s run to do the inner tube run, and the tubes are small, but everyone uses the same tube. So I’m six foot five, my kids are four years old, and everyone uses the same size tube. It should have been a message to me not to get on this thing. But I went and got on it and on the first run, I went down and you’re going super fast, 35 miles an hour, and the tube hit the braking mats and it stopped. The tube just stopped where it was. It just threw me. My head was facing downhill, so that’s created the wrong center of gravity. So instead of braking, it just threw me.
I landed on my head. My head went into my chest, compression into my chest, down like that. I ruptured my spine at C6 and C7. And in the blink of a second, I was paralyzed. I was like, “What?” Just impossible to comprehend. And they put this big thing, this halo on my head, and they take me to the hospital, which was more of a medical clinic. And I’m just like, “What is going on here?”
Lex Fridman
Do you remember your thoughts from the moment it happened to when you got to the hospital?
Do you remember your thoughts from the moment it happened to when you got to the hospital?
Kimbal Musk
So this is one of the things that actually the doctor said caused the most damage was I was thrown from the tube, and I heard this big crunch sound in my body and I knew that I was hurt, but I didn’t feel any pain. That’s also, why wouldn’t you feel pain? Because when you’re paralyzed, you don’t feel pain. And I’m face down on the snow and the snow is burning my face because you can’t do that. You need something. And I found a way to turn myself around so that my face wouldn’t be on the ground, but I knew I couldn’t move. And that they said actually caused more damage. Well, obviously, the accident created the opening, but once you move your body, the blood goes into the spinal column at a faster rate. And that is what caused my paralysis. But I remember that and I remember getting into the ambulance.
So this is one of the things that actually the doctor said caused the most damage was I was thrown from the tube, and I heard this big crunch sound in my body and I knew that I was hurt, but I didn’t feel any pain. That’s also, why wouldn’t you feel pain? Because when you’re paralyzed, you don’t feel pain. And I’m face down on the snow and the snow is burning my face because you can’t do that. You need something. And I found a way to turn myself around so that my face wouldn’t be on the ground, but I knew I couldn’t move. And that they said actually caused more damage. Well, obviously, the accident created the opening, but once you move your body, the blood goes into the spinal column at a faster rate. And that is what caused my paralysis. But I remember that and I remember getting into the ambulance.
Lex Fridman
Did you think you were going to die in those seconds, minutes?
Did you think you were going to die in those seconds, minutes?
Kimbal Musk
It was a different feeling than death. It was more of a, what is going on here? It was more like, I can’t make sense of what’s going on. There was a moment where I got to the hospital and they did this MRI and the doctor comes up to me and says, “Look, we’ve done this MRI.” Now I’m in the hospital and I’m like, “I can’t move.” But I also don’t feel any pain. So it’s very confusing. Your body looks like you can move it. Look, see how I’m moving my hand? It looks like you can do that and then it just doesn’t move. There’s no feedback loop that it’s not moving. Your brain even thinks it’s moving, but it’s not moving. It’s the worst, most terrifying thing.
It was a different feeling than death. It was more of a, what is going on here? It was more like, I can’t make sense of what’s going on. There was a moment where I got to the hospital and they did this MRI and the doctor comes up to me and says, “Look, we’ve done this MRI.” Now I’m in the hospital and I’m like, “I can’t move.” But I also don’t feel any pain. So it’s very confusing. Your body looks like you can move it. Look, see how I’m moving my hand? It looks like you can do that and then it just doesn’t move. There’s no feedback loop that it’s not moving. Your brain even thinks it’s moving, but it’s not moving. It’s the worst, most terrifying thing.
So the doctor says, “Look, the way you broke your neck, really, at a zero degree angle, that is so rare, but as a result, there is no twisting of the spine. We think that we can get the blood out of your spinal column and you should get some or maybe all of your movement back.” And I was like, “Oh, okay. I think I’m going to be fine. I guess I’m going to be fine.” And then I realized I had tears just streaming down the side of my face and I was like, “Whoa, man. I have no idea what is going on.”
Lex Fridman
So this kind of intense state of confusion, I wonder if it’s a weird psychological defense mechanism of taking you away from the obvious possibility of death.
So this kind of intense state of confusion, I wonder if it’s a weird psychological defense mechanism of taking you away from the obvious possibility of death.
Kimbal Musk
For sure, all of the defenses were up. I don’t know else to describe it. But there was denial. There was this curiosity of, why is there no pain? When they did actually repair me and fix me, it was three days later, the pain was indescribable how much pain I was in, but there was no pain for three days.
For sure, all of the defenses were up. I don’t know else to describe it. But there was denial. There was this curiosity of, why is there no pain? When they did actually repair me and fix me, it was three days later, the pain was indescribable how much pain I was in, but there was no pain for three days.
Lex Fridman
The human body is fascinating,
The human body is fascinating,
Kimbal Musk
Man.
Man.
Lex Fridman
Wow. So they were able?
Wow. So they were able?
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, so they did the surgery. But I had this very clear voice in my head that I’ve determined that it’s God, I’m not religious, but I don’t know how else to describe the voice. And this voice was very clear. “You’re going to work with kids and food.” Okay, where did that come from? I’m a tech CEO. I have a restaurant. We were working with some kids in schools with helping at a local nonprofit. And he’s like, “No, you’re just going to work on kids and food.” My good friend Antonio and my brother were in the hospital and I was like, “I’m going to work on kids and food.” They were like, “He’s crazy. He’s lost his mind.” But not that they were arguing, no one was arguing with me, but I was like, “I’m just going to do that. I need to say it out loud.” And I remember resigning from my job as the CEO from the hospital, and that was it.
Yeah, so they did the surgery. But I had this very clear voice in my head that I’ve determined that it’s God, I’m not religious, but I don’t know how else to describe the voice. And this voice was very clear. “You’re going to work with kids and food.” Okay, where did that come from? I’m a tech CEO. I have a restaurant. We were working with some kids in schools with helping at a local nonprofit. And he’s like, “No, you’re just going to work on kids and food.” My good friend Antonio and my brother were in the hospital and I was like, “I’m going to work on kids and food.” They were like, “He’s crazy. He’s lost his mind.” But not that they were arguing, no one was arguing with me, but I was like, “I’m just going to do that. I need to say it out loud.” And I remember resigning from my job as the CEO from the hospital, and that was it.
It was just clear. It was a clear voice. It wasn’t for a moment. It wasn’t like a flash of light or anything. It was probably two weeks of clear voice.
Lex Fridman
Of clarity.
Of clarity.
Kimbal Musk
Clarity. Exactly, clarity. No monkey brain, nothing. No monkey brain, just clarity.
Clarity. Exactly, clarity. No monkey brain, nothing. No monkey brain, just clarity.
Lex Fridman
So you’re not a religious person, but you do call it the voice of God. Who is that God, do you think? Who is that? Where did that come from?
So you’re not a religious person, but you do call it the voice of God. Who is that God, do you think? Who is that? Where did that come from?
Kimbal Musk
Well, I’ve done ayahuasca and I’ve spoken to what they call Mother Aya, which is another version of God. It’s a divine presence, I think is a better way to say it. I’ve also had this debate in my head. Maybe it’s just me. I’m talking to me and it’s my peaceful, more kinder, less caught up in the emotion of the day version of me. Maybe it’s me. Okay, maybe it is, but it’s there.
Well, I’ve done ayahuasca and I’ve spoken to what they call Mother Aya, which is another version of God. It’s a divine presence, I think is a better way to say it. I’ve also had this debate in my head. Maybe it’s just me. I’m talking to me and it’s my peaceful, more kinder, less caught up in the emotion of the day version of me. Maybe it’s me. Okay, maybe it is, but it’s there.
Lex Fridman
But who are you? How deep does it go? What does you mean? First of all, the depth of what the human mind even is, is a gigantic mystery, consciousness, all of it. Who are you? So yeah, maybe it is you, but then maybe in order to build you, we need to build the universe. You are actually fundamentally a part of this whole human society, so the pieces of humans that you’ve interacted with are all within you. And then maybe the history of the humans that came before are also in there. And maybe the entirety of life on earth is also in there. And whatever brought life about on earth is in there somewhere. So that’s all you.
But who are you? How deep does it go? What does you mean? First of all, the depth of what the human mind even is, is a gigantic mystery, consciousness, all of it. Who are you? So yeah, maybe it is you, but then maybe in order to build you, we need to build the universe. You are actually fundamentally a part of this whole human society, so the pieces of humans that you’ve interacted with are all within you. And then maybe the history of the humans that came before are also in there. And maybe the entirety of life on earth is also in there. And whatever brought life about on earth is in there somewhere. So that’s all you.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, which is really true. It literally is true that we all are, the photons from the sun came in.
Yeah, which is really true. It literally is true that we all are, the photons from the sun came in.
Lex Fridman
You’re part fish.
You’re part fish.
Kimbal Musk
We all came from all that. One of the things I do is meditate, I’ve been meditating for many, many years, and the way I meditate is I sit and I listen to my thoughts and I simply just do that for 15 to 20 minutes. It just calms the nervous system, and I might breathe and just breathe through because it’s been a stressful day and it’s just a beautiful way I do it around. I remember I said I used to do a [inaudible 01:12:08] at the bar after work. Now I go meditate, for instance.
We all came from all that. One of the things I do is meditate, I’ve been meditating for many, many years, and the way I meditate is I sit and I listen to my thoughts and I simply just do that for 15 to 20 minutes. It just calms the nervous system, and I might breathe and just breathe through because it’s been a stressful day and it’s just a beautiful way I do it around. I remember I said I used to do a [inaudible 01:12:08] at the bar after work. Now I go meditate, for instance.
Lex Fridman
Same thing.
Same thing.
Kimbal Musk
A little bit better for my health. But meditation I was taught. Sam Harris actually taught me. It was not so much just about watching your thoughts, but realizing that you’re a watcher. You’re actually a watcher. Who is the person watching? That’s you actually. Your thoughts are floating through your mind, but you are the watcher. And I was like, oh, that’s really interesting. Okay, so I’m going to learn that. I’m going to be the watcher. And what I learned was I’m watching these thoughts go by and there’s a consistent other presence. And I’m like, what is that consistent other presence? It’s not a thought. It’s not something I can let it float away, and it doesn’t even want to float away. It’s just a consistent other presence that I can watch and feel.
A little bit better for my health. But meditation I was taught. Sam Harris actually taught me. It was not so much just about watching your thoughts, but realizing that you’re a watcher. You’re actually a watcher. Who is the person watching? That’s you actually. Your thoughts are floating through your mind, but you are the watcher. And I was like, oh, that’s really interesting. Okay, so I’m going to learn that. I’m going to be the watcher. And what I learned was I’m watching these thoughts go by and there’s a consistent other presence. And I’m like, what is that consistent other presence? It’s not a thought. It’s not something I can let it float away, and it doesn’t even want to float away. It’s just a consistent other presence that I can watch and feel.
Lex Fridman
So you are the watcher watching the feelings and thoughts, but there’s also other presence next to you almost?
So you are the watcher watching the feelings and thoughts, but there’s also other presence next to you almost?
Kimbal Musk
Yes. Yeah, that’s how I feel. And it’s a beautiful presence. It’s not a presence that is trying to intervene. It’s not a presence that is trying to tell you what to do. It’s just a beautiful presence.
Yes. Yeah, that’s how I feel. And it’s a beautiful presence. It’s not a presence that is trying to intervene. It’s not a presence that is trying to tell you what to do. It’s just a beautiful presence.
Lex Fridman
And that might be part of the thing you met when you took Ayahuasca.
And that might be part of the thing you met when you took Ayahuasca.
Kimbal Musk
I learned about Mother Ayahuasca where you have this experience of talking to… Actually, I would say the closest thing to breaking my neck, that feeling was ayahuasca.
I learned about Mother Ayahuasca where you have this experience of talking to… Actually, I would say the closest thing to breaking my neck, that feeling was ayahuasca.
Lex Fridman
Can you go through that experience? Because I’m actually traveling to the Amazon jungle in a month. I’ll probably do ayahuasca for the first time.
Can you go through that experience? Because I’m actually traveling to the Amazon jungle in a month. I’ll probably do ayahuasca for the first time.
Kimbal Musk
Okay.
Okay.
Lex Fridman
I need a preview, unofficial instruction manual.
I need a preview, unofficial instruction manual.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, sure. First of all, I think there are many different ways to do it, and I’ve done many different ways. There’s a very western medicine approach where you have doctors that look after you during the day, put an eye mask on, you’re on a futon, and you really are in a western medicine setting. And it frankly for me has been the most powerful experience. I feel the most comfortable part of western medicine in my upbringing. The other extreme, but they’re in-between would be very probably Peruvian ceremonies, where you’re probably going to go, very much about you do it in a community, you do it with others, and you feel people go through their pain and their processing. So I know the whole gamut, but the thing that I found most powerful about it and profoundly powerful, I would say, first of all, it’s non-recreational. No one should do this for a good time. This is not a good time. This is a very…
Yeah, sure. First of all, I think there are many different ways to do it, and I’ve done many different ways. There’s a very western medicine approach where you have doctors that look after you during the day, put an eye mask on, you’re on a futon, and you really are in a western medicine setting. And it frankly for me has been the most powerful experience. I feel the most comfortable part of western medicine in my upbringing. The other extreme, but they’re in-between would be very probably Peruvian ceremonies, where you’re probably going to go, very much about you do it in a community, you do it with others, and you feel people go through their pain and their processing. So I know the whole gamut, but the thing that I found most powerful about it and profoundly powerful, I would say, first of all, it’s non-recreational. No one should do this for a good time. This is not a good time. This is a very…
Lex Fridman
Almost traumatic, but in, again, a beautiful way.
Almost traumatic, but in, again, a beautiful way.
Kimbal Musk
I was actually going to say that word, but it’s not traumatic. It’s profound. So it’s more like you really leave who you were before behind, and then you become the person you will be afterwards.
I was actually going to say that word, but it’s not traumatic. It’s profound. So it’s more like you really leave who you were before behind, and then you become the person you will be afterwards.
Lex Fridman
And that’s never an easy thing.
And that’s never an easy thing.
Kimbal Musk
Yes, exactly. And what I recall was arguing with Mother Aya and saying, “No, I’m fine. What are you talking about? Leave me alone.”
Yes, exactly. And what I recall was arguing with Mother Aya and saying, “No, I’m fine. What are you talking about? Leave me alone.”
Road trip across US
Lex Fridman
How did that work out? But before 2010, the accident and the two transformational experiences you had, you were a very successful tech CEO. Maybe go back to the early days with Zip2. In 1994, you and Elon started Zip2. Tell me the story of that.
How did that work out? But before 2010, the accident and the two transformational experiences you had, you were a very successful tech CEO. Maybe go back to the early days with Zip2. In 1994, you and Elon started Zip2. Tell me the story of that.
Kimbal Musk
So in ’94, we actually did a road trip around the U.S. to brainstorm about what we wanted to do after college.
So in ’94, we actually did a road trip around the U.S. to brainstorm about what we wanted to do after college.
Lex Fridman
What was the road trip like?
What was the road trip like?
Kimbal Musk
That was awesome. So we went from Silicon Valley to Philadelphia. My brother’s old very really cool, it’s one of those very old BMW’s, not ones from the ’60s or ’70s, but the car didn’t work. It would break down all the time, but we had a blast. I remember going through Needles, on the border of California in Arizona, there’s a town called Needles, it’s the hottest place in America, and the engine was not cooling, so we had to put the heat on. So we had the heat blasting to cool the engine, keep the engine cool, and keep the windows down because you can’t stand the heat in the car. But actually the outside heat is hotter than the inside heat, so you’re just in a furnace if you’re driving through.
That was awesome. So we went from Silicon Valley to Philadelphia. My brother’s old very really cool, it’s one of those very old BMW’s, not ones from the ’60s or ’70s, but the car didn’t work. It would break down all the time, but we had a blast. I remember going through Needles, on the border of California in Arizona, there’s a town called Needles, it’s the hottest place in America, and the engine was not cooling, so we had to put the heat on. So we had the heat blasting to cool the engine, keep the engine cool, and keep the windows down because you can’t stand the heat in the car. But actually the outside heat is hotter than the inside heat, so you’re just in a furnace if you’re driving through.
Lex Fridman
Just sweating.
Just sweating.
Kimbal Musk
This is at night even. I can’t imagine doing that in the day.
This is at night even. I can’t imagine doing that in the day.
Lex Fridman
Oh, wow.
Oh, wow.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, it was wonderful. It took us a few weeks. I think three weeks maybe.
Yeah, it was wonderful. It took us a few weeks. I think three weeks maybe.
Lex Fridman
First time across America?
First time across America?
Kimbal Musk
First road trip like that, yeah, for sure. But it was really not a road trip for tourist sites. We went to the weirdest places. And actually, I would say, we didn’t go to them. We broke down in the weirdest places because that’s when we stopped.
First road trip like that, yeah, for sure. But it was really not a road trip for tourist sites. We went to the weirdest places. And actually, I would say, we didn’t go to them. We broke down in the weirdest places because that’s when we stopped.
Lex Fridman
Did you meet any interesting people?
Did you meet any interesting people?
Kimbal Musk
I remember we broke down in the Badlands of South Dakota, about an hour from Rapid City. That road is empty, and so we actually slept in the car because there was just no one around. No cell phones in those days. And eventually a trucker picked us up. He was just like, “Man, you guys are the dumbest kids on the planet.” I was 21. He was maybe 22. But he was so nice to us and so kind to us, and found us a mechanic in Rapid City and then found us a tow truck. You find the most wonderful people. When you’re in a place of distress, people do want to take care of other people.
I remember we broke down in the Badlands of South Dakota, about an hour from Rapid City. That road is empty, and so we actually slept in the car because there was just no one around. No cell phones in those days. And eventually a trucker picked us up. He was just like, “Man, you guys are the dumbest kids on the planet.” I was 21. He was maybe 22. But he was so nice to us and so kind to us, and found us a mechanic in Rapid City and then found us a tow truck. You find the most wonderful people. When you’re in a place of distress, people do want to take care of other people.
Lex Fridman
They help you.
They help you.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, they want to help.
Yeah, they want to help.
Lex Fridman
And especially when you’re on a road trip, because I’ve taken a road trip across the United States, and there’s a part of people where they really love that. I think part of them wants to do that also, wants to escape whatever the local struggles. Just whatever the mundaneness, the struggles of life are, a road trip is a kind of thing where you’re like, you know what? I’m going to get away from it all and I’m going to experience life in the full epic Jack Kerouac way of seeing America. And the people. Not the tourist sites, just the humans.
And especially when you’re on a road trip, because I’ve taken a road trip across the United States, and there’s a part of people where they really love that. I think part of them wants to do that also, wants to escape whatever the local struggles. Just whatever the mundaneness, the struggles of life are, a road trip is a kind of thing where you’re like, you know what? I’m going to get away from it all and I’m going to experience life in the full epic Jack Kerouac way of seeing America. And the people. Not the tourist sites, just the humans.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, exactly. This was not tourist related. We did, of course, one. We stopped at Mount Rushmore at night, which you can see nothing. We thought that was hilarious. We couldn’t see Mount Rushmore.
Yeah, exactly. This was not tourist related. We did, of course, one. We stopped at Mount Rushmore at night, which you can see nothing. We thought that was hilarious. We couldn’t see Mount Rushmore.
Lex Fridman
That’s great.
That’s great.
Kimbal Musk
It was like, well, we physically were here. We took a photo of us not seeing Mount Rushmore.
It was like, well, we physically were here. We took a photo of us not seeing Mount Rushmore.
Lex Fridman
In the darkness. You could just say you went to the Grand Canyon too, just at night. And just visit different places when the car broke down, I love it. So yes, you took the road trip before founding Zip2.
In the darkness. You could just say you went to the Grand Canyon too, just at night. And just visit different places when the car broke down, I love it. So yes, you took the road trip before founding Zip2.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. So I had a experience in college running a house painting business. That, for me, was my first experience with success. It was very, very hard. It was a franchise where they teach students how to paint houses, but I was good at it. I built a team of 30 people after about two years. So I was like, I had a taste of, hey, I’m not unable to do this. In fact, my most vulnerable place I remember as an entrepreneur was I just loved the idea of Wall Street and finance. I was allured by it. This is in the late ’80s. I’m in high school and there was a lot of these books, Liar’s Poker and others that came out and I was like, ah, man, this is awesome. These people must be amazing.
Yeah. So I had a experience in college running a house painting business. That, for me, was my first experience with success. It was very, very hard. It was a franchise where they teach students how to paint houses, but I was good at it. I built a team of 30 people after about two years. So I was like, I had a taste of, hey, I’m not unable to do this. In fact, my most vulnerable place I remember as an entrepreneur was I just loved the idea of Wall Street and finance. I was allured by it. This is in the late ’80s. I’m in high school and there was a lot of these books, Liar’s Poker and others that came out and I was like, ah, man, this is awesome. These people must be amazing.
So I went to business school and I busted my ass to get a kick-ass summer job, and I got a job in one of the main banks. It was in Toronto, but it was like their version of Wall Street. I was so disappointed with the people that I was around. I was just like, whoa. I totally misunderstood what the banking world is. It was a very large bank. I’m sure if I’d gone to a more aggressive one, maybe I would’ve had a better experience. I say aggressive, meaning someone was paying attention. This was just a…
Kimbal Musk
Aggressive meaning someone was paying attention. This was just people showing up and not doing much. Actually, it is funny. This is great. So 1991, ’92, so one of those summers, but the summer job was literally they print out the sales for all the brokerage houses for the whole company. It’s a pile of papers that’s maybe four or five feet tall and you have a pencil and you add things up using your pencil and a calculator. And I had known about Lotus 1-2-3 forever. Excel was coming out and I was like, “Hey, guys, you know that there’s a different way to do this.” And they’re like, “Don’t talk to us. This is just your job. Go do it.”
Aggressive meaning someone was paying attention. This was just people showing up and not doing much. Actually, it is funny. This is great. So 1991, ’92, so one of those summers, but the summer job was literally they print out the sales for all the brokerage houses for the whole company. It’s a pile of papers that’s maybe four or five feet tall and you have a pencil and you add things up using your pencil and a calculator. And I had known about Lotus 1-2-3 forever. Excel was coming out and I was like, “Hey, guys, you know that there’s a different way to do this.” And they’re like, “Don’t talk to us. This is just your job. Go do it.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah, just use the pencil.
Yeah, just use the pencil.
Kimbal Musk
So I went to the head of the data… I just asked because in those days you had the manila envelope where you just write the name of the person that you want this to go to and it’ll go to them. It’s like email, I guess, but there’s no filter.
So I went to the head of the data… I just asked because in those days you had the manila envelope where you just write the name of the person that you want this to go to and it’ll go to them. It’s like email, I guess, but there’s no filter.
Lex Fridman
There’s no spam filter.
There’s no spam filter.
Kimbal Musk
There’s no spam filter. So I sent a note, I wrote a nice letter to the database administrator who I didn’t really know, and I said, “Would you be open to me saying hi and maybe I can get access to the file rather than print the damn thing out and use a pencil?” And she responded right away and we hit it off. She was great. So she’s like, “Of course you can [inaudible 01:22:43] I can’t believe these guys are doing what they’re doing.” So for the first couple of weeks of the summer, I wrote code in Lotus 1-2-3 that would… This is going to sound crazy, but you type in the date range and you type in the geography and you type in which part of the bank you care about, and it will literally just create a new spreadsheet and it will just, a macro would print it out. It was like a magic trick for these guys.
There’s no spam filter. So I sent a note, I wrote a nice letter to the database administrator who I didn’t really know, and I said, “Would you be open to me saying hi and maybe I can get access to the file rather than print the damn thing out and use a pencil?” And she responded right away and we hit it off. She was great. So she’s like, “Of course you can [inaudible 01:22:43] I can’t believe these guys are doing what they’re doing.” So for the first couple of weeks of the summer, I wrote code in Lotus 1-2-3 that would… This is going to sound crazy, but you type in the date range and you type in the geography and you type in which part of the bank you care about, and it will literally just create a new spreadsheet and it will just, a macro would print it out. It was like a magic trick for these guys.
Lex Fridman
Incredible.
Incredible.
Kimbal Musk
I know. No, it’s [inaudible 01:23:20] for me, I was like, “Guys, this is so obvious.” So I got all that done and this job was supposed to take three or four months because it’s really, you’re doing this with a pencil and now I’ve created this macro that you could not just do it, you could do it, you could tweak it and say, “Oh, I want this area of the world or this area of or this month or that month compared to that month,” all the normal things you could do with the spreadsheet. And the software was on a floppy disk. And I was like, “Here’s the software and just put it into your computer right now, open 1-2-3 and it just pops up with a little box that type in your dates and the whole little, I coded a little thing like that.”
I know. No, it’s [inaudible 01:23:20] for me, I was like, “Guys, this is so obvious.” So I got all that done and this job was supposed to take three or four months because it’s really, you’re doing this with a pencil and now I’ve created this macro that you could not just do it, you could do it, you could tweak it and say, “Oh, I want this area of the world or this area of or this month or that month compared to that month,” all the normal things you could do with the spreadsheet. And the software was on a floppy disk. And I was like, “Here’s the software and just put it into your computer right now, open 1-2-3 and it just pops up with a little box that type in your dates and the whole little, I coded a little thing like that.”
And what I was astounded by was not so much that there was a magic trick, it was the lack of appreciation for innovation. They just looked at it and they were like, “Huh, that’s nice.” And I was like, “We’re going to have someone spend hundreds of hours doing something and now it’s something you can do in a minute.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah, if that doesn’t fill you with excitement…
Yeah, if that doesn’t fill you with excitement…
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, if that doesn’t move your needle, what the heck? And so I was really disappointed with the banking world. But anyway, that was also fine. That’s…
Yeah, if that doesn’t move your needle, what the heck? And so I was really disappointed with the banking world. But anyway, that was also fine. That’s…
Lex Fridman
Such a good example though. Yeah. And then also see the possibility of where that goes.
Such a good example though. Yeah. And then also see the possibility of where that goes.
Kimbal Musk
Then I got back to business school and I canceled all of my business classes I possibly could. But I was actually in business school, so I couldn’t cancel them all. All finance courses, I was like, “I’m done with that industry. I’m not going back.” So the vulnerable part for me was my whole family’s full of entrepreneurs and there was this franchise to do house painting, and I genuinely was afraid that I wouldn’t be good at it. And I was like, “Wow, I really am afraid of failure.” It’s very easy to avoid entrepreneurship, but if your whole family’s entrepreneurs and you go in and you aren’t good, I was really afraid.
Then I got back to business school and I canceled all of my business classes I possibly could. But I was actually in business school, so I couldn’t cancel them all. All finance courses, I was like, “I’m done with that industry. I’m not going back.” So the vulnerable part for me was my whole family’s full of entrepreneurs and there was this franchise to do house painting, and I genuinely was afraid that I wouldn’t be good at it. And I was like, “Wow, I really am afraid of failure.” It’s very easy to avoid entrepreneurship, but if your whole family’s entrepreneurs and you go in and you aren’t good, I was really afraid.
Lex Fridman
You’re going to have to face that failure every time you meet your family.
You’re going to have to face that failure every time you meet your family.
Kimbal Musk
Yes. And our family are wonderful and everything, but pretty much everyone’s an entrepreneur. And of course not everyone is perfect. Not everyone’s doing it successfully all the time, but when you’re young and you want to prove yourself, it really was putting my heart on my sleeve. I started the business in this part of Toronto and for the first… Paint the houses in the summer, but you do all your sales pre before the summer and all the way until April, I was just not succeeding. And I was like, I’m like, “Oh my God, I’m just going to fail.” And I remember that my whole nervous system was like, “I’m a failure.” And I remember I had this gentle manager who he was like, “You seem like you know what you’re doing. Why are you not making any sales?” So he actually went with me on a few sales calls and he said, “Oh, he was great. You’re doing this wrong, you’re doing that wrong, you’re doing this wrong.”
Yes. And our family are wonderful and everything, but pretty much everyone’s an entrepreneur. And of course not everyone is perfect. Not everyone’s doing it successfully all the time, but when you’re young and you want to prove yourself, it really was putting my heart on my sleeve. I started the business in this part of Toronto and for the first… Paint the houses in the summer, but you do all your sales pre before the summer and all the way until April, I was just not succeeding. And I was like, I’m like, “Oh my God, I’m just going to fail.” And I remember that my whole nervous system was like, “I’m a failure.” And I remember I had this gentle manager who he was like, “You seem like you know what you’re doing. Why are you not making any sales?” So he actually went with me on a few sales calls and he said, “Oh, he was great. You’re doing this wrong, you’re doing that wrong, you’re doing this wrong.”
And changed those three things. And it was like a watershed moment just all of a sudden. And I just followed the instructions of what this guy told me. All of a sudden, every single sale I would make, I was like, I can’t believe that it was really my lack of humility to learn from someone else. I was like, “No, I’m going to prove that I can do this without your teachings,” and I was going to fail.
Lex Fridman
So to you, that humility is essential for the entrepreneur, especially young.
So to you, that humility is essential for the entrepreneur, especially young.
Kimbal Musk
I would say if we have an openness to learning, which does require humility, and you course correct or you help get other people to help you course correct. But it does start with humility because if you try and pretend you have all the answers, you don’t.
I would say if we have an openness to learning, which does require humility, and you course correct or you help get other people to help you course correct. But it does start with humility because if you try and pretend you have all the answers, you don’t.
Zip2
Lex Fridman
So you went from that to founding Zip2. That was an interesting time in the history of tech.
So you went from that to founding Zip2. That was an interesting time in the history of tech.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
But what was it like? You mentioned and the first people to look at a map basically at directions.
But what was it like? You mentioned and the first people to look at a map basically at directions.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. So mapping had been on the internet but vector-based mapping had not. So that’s the ability to zoom in or zoom out, and it’s really data versus an image that comes across. And we went into this company called Navtech, my brother and I, and we just asked for the data and this is Silicon Valley. They wrote us a one page letter that we had to sign and said, “Here’s all of our data that we own it, you don’t own it, but you can use it on the internet and if you ever make any money on it, you have to call us.” That was it. We’re like, “Okay, that sounds great.” And so we put it up on the internet and back in those days, it might take 60 to 120 seconds to actually give you an answer back, but it was amazing. The door to door directions, the ability to take a map and zoom in and zoom out. We use these things 10 times a day now. It was amazing. And we were the first two humans to see it on the internet because this stuff didn’t even exist to the world.
Yeah. So mapping had been on the internet but vector-based mapping had not. So that’s the ability to zoom in or zoom out, and it’s really data versus an image that comes across. And we went into this company called Navtech, my brother and I, and we just asked for the data and this is Silicon Valley. They wrote us a one page letter that we had to sign and said, “Here’s all of our data that we own it, you don’t own it, but you can use it on the internet and if you ever make any money on it, you have to call us.” That was it. We’re like, “Okay, that sounds great.” And so we put it up on the internet and back in those days, it might take 60 to 120 seconds to actually give you an answer back, but it was amazing. The door to door directions, the ability to take a map and zoom in and zoom out. We use these things 10 times a day now. It was amazing. And we were the first two humans to see it on the internet because this stuff didn’t even exist to the world.
Navtech was building it for NeverLost, for Hertz NeverLost, which would come out a few years later. This was not something that people knew existed. This was something we discovered that it existed. Let’s put it on the internet and share it with the world.
Lex Fridman
What did the two of you feel like to see that magic? Did you know…
What did the two of you feel like to see that magic? Did you know…
Kimbal Musk
It’s amazing. It was like, “What?”
It’s amazing. It was like, “What?”
Lex Fridman
Did you mean the amazing, just that it’s cool, but also that you could see the future that this could transform…
Did you mean the amazing, just that it’s cool, but also that you could see the future that this could transform…
Kimbal Musk
I don’t think people understand before this moment, you could not be told your directions. You just could not. Today, we live in this world where you’re told our directions all the time. Before this moment you could not be told your directions and all of a sudden you could. It wasn’t like a little thing.
I don’t think people understand before this moment, you could not be told your directions. You just could not. Today, we live in this world where you’re told our directions all the time. Before this moment you could not be told your directions and all of a sudden you could. It wasn’t like a little thing.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, there’s a bunch of things that once we have, we take it for granted. And that takes a day for people to transition.
Yeah, there’s a bunch of things that once we have, we take it for granted. And that takes a day for people to transition.
Kimbal Musk
Totally.
Totally.
Lex Fridman
It’s like, “Oh, okay, cool.”
It’s like, “Oh, okay, cool.”
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. Right. Exactly. Exactly.
Yeah. Right. Exactly. Exactly.
Lex Fridman
And when you see, maybe when you’re one of the first humans to see that thing, you’re like, “Holy, shit.”
And when you see, maybe when you’re one of the first humans to see that thing, you’re like, “Holy, shit.”
Kimbal Musk
Holy shit. This is going to be used by everyone all the time forever.
Holy shit. This is going to be used by everyone all the time forever.
Lex Fridman
So Zip2 was a success.
So Zip2 was a success.
Kimbal Musk
I would say it was a success but it was also a very hard company to build. And I mean it because the internet in those days was a boom time. We were being funded, but you couldn’t make any money. So it was actually really hard, the constant outside criticism that we aren’t for real. This is not going to survive. This is not going to… And it started to feel that way. We’re like, “Wow, man, we are doing something that is great that people are using.” And we were top 100 website. Most of our work was through folks like The New York Times. So we were even much, much busier than that. But there was just no money at it. And even today, go to Google Maps, there’s no money in it. It’s just a local search that is needed for everyone. And so it became an add-on to search. But even remember in those days, you couldn’t make money at search either. No one had figured out AdWords or anything, they didn’t realize how big of a business this was. But we all knew this was a thing and everyone was using it.
I would say it was a success but it was also a very hard company to build. And I mean it because the internet in those days was a boom time. We were being funded, but you couldn’t make any money. So it was actually really hard, the constant outside criticism that we aren’t for real. This is not going to survive. This is not going to… And it started to feel that way. We’re like, “Wow, man, we are doing something that is great that people are using.” And we were top 100 website. Most of our work was through folks like The New York Times. So we were even much, much busier than that. But there was just no money at it. And even today, go to Google Maps, there’s no money in it. It’s just a local search that is needed for everyone. And so it became an add-on to search. But even remember in those days, you couldn’t make money at search either. No one had figured out AdWords or anything, they didn’t realize how big of a business this was. But we all knew this was a thing and everyone was using it.
Lex Fridman
But didn’t quite know how to make money on it.
But didn’t quite know how to make money on it.
Kimbal Musk
Didn’t make money. When we got acquired, it was a bittersweet moment because Compact that owned AltaVista wanted to merge so that sort of regular search with the best search engine at the time, pre-Google with Zip2, which would be the best local search, and it would be a Yahoo killer. And the Compact just wanted to make money by taking the company public but they wouldn’t give us any stock. They paid us cash return out, actually very well for us, but because the whole internet bubble burst, we didn’t know that at the time. And so it was bittersweet because they essentially wanted our company and we were welcome to stay but you don’t have to. And that feeling, that was a pretty rough feeling. Yeah.
Didn’t make money. When we got acquired, it was a bittersweet moment because Compact that owned AltaVista wanted to merge so that sort of regular search with the best search engine at the time, pre-Google with Zip2, which would be the best local search, and it would be a Yahoo killer. And the Compact just wanted to make money by taking the company public but they wouldn’t give us any stock. They paid us cash return out, actually very well for us, but because the whole internet bubble burst, we didn’t know that at the time. And so it was bittersweet because they essentially wanted our company and we were welcome to stay but you don’t have to. And that feeling, that was a pretty rough feeling. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
But in retrospect, it opened the door to…
But in retrospect, it opened the door to…
Kimbal Musk
It set us up for an incredible platform to go do beautiful things.
It set us up for an incredible platform to go do beautiful things.
Tesla
Lex Fridman
You’ve invested in X. com that eventually merged with PayPal. That’s a fascinating story there, also fascinating on many levels, including the fact that the current social media company, formerly known as Twitter, is now called X. History has a rhyme to it. It’s kind of all hilarious in a certain kind of way. You invested in and help sell a lot of the initial products for Tesla.
You’ve invested in X. com that eventually merged with PayPal. That’s a fascinating story there, also fascinating on many levels, including the fact that the current social media company, formerly known as Twitter, is now called X. History has a rhyme to it. It’s kind of all hilarious in a certain kind of way. You invested in and help sell a lot of the initial products for Tesla.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah, I still sell on the board of Tesla. Tesla is 20 years now. Isn’t that amazing?
Yeah, I still sell on the board of Tesla. Tesla is 20 years now. Isn’t that amazing?
Lex Fridman
20 years.
20 years.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
From the Roadster, the initial Roadster to…
From the Roadster, the initial Roadster to…
Kimbal Musk
I still have the first business plan. So I didn’t join as a founder, I joined as a founding board member. And so I actually, I didn’t write the business plan. I got to read it and I still have that. I still have it as a part of history.
I still have the first business plan. So I didn’t join as a founder, I joined as a founding board member. And so I actually, I didn’t write the business plan. I got to read it and I still have that. I still have it as a part of history.
Lex Fridman
Did you see the future at that time, the company that Tesla is today? Could you have possibly, could you and Elon imagine it?
Did you see the future at that time, the company that Tesla is today? Could you have possibly, could you and Elon imagine it?
Kimbal Musk
No. No, I certainly didn’t. What I saw in it was a real… For me personally, I was really upset that the General Motors had killed their EV car. There’s even a movie called Who Killed the Electric Car? And I knew that the physics of electric is perfectly fine. There’s no reason why you couldn’t use an electric car to drive around. What resonated with me with the business plan was take an electric motor, which is really a high performance motor, and put it in a sports car and sell it at a high price as a way to enter into the market. Whereas what others had been doing, or at least General Motors had done, is you put it into a really crummy car and you sell it as a commuter vehicle that doesn’t really work that well and looks ugly as well. They really did everything you could to make that thing as ugly as Zen. And then I was like, “Okay, I get it. We’re going to take an appropriate technology and put it in an appropriate car so that when you have…”
No. No, I certainly didn’t. What I saw in it was a real… For me personally, I was really upset that the General Motors had killed their EV car. There’s even a movie called Who Killed the Electric Car? And I knew that the physics of electric is perfectly fine. There’s no reason why you couldn’t use an electric car to drive around. What resonated with me with the business plan was take an electric motor, which is really a high performance motor, and put it in a sports car and sell it at a high price as a way to enter into the market. Whereas what others had been doing, or at least General Motors had done, is you put it into a really crummy car and you sell it as a commuter vehicle that doesn’t really work that well and looks ugly as well. They really did everything you could to make that thing as ugly as Zen. And then I was like, “Okay, I get it. We’re going to take an appropriate technology and put it in an appropriate car so that when you have…”
Because electric motors, they have constant torque, incredible power, put it in a car that looks like a sports car. So the idea was to put it in the Lotus release, redesign it a bit. And even at that point I was like, “This is theoretically good, so I’m going to join and help build it.” But I was not convinced that it would work because General Motors had done such a terrible job of making everyone think that these things are terrible. But I was curious. And the time that I fell in love with the company and its mission was I was driving in what’s called a mule where we take a car and we take the engine out and we put in electric drive train and I drove it. Even the dashboards, there’s no dashboard. It’s just you got a steering wheel and it’s just wires and everything around. And I remember there’s a street, we were running the Bay Area called Bing Street, and I was just like… No traffic. So I’m just going to drive this on the floor and see what happens.
And it was a feeling I’d never experienced before. Gasoline cars have an inertia to them. So you go… This was being shot out of a cannon. And I was like, “Okay, this is going to be real.”
Lex Fridman
It’s a very spaceship-like feeling.
It’s a very spaceship-like feeling.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. It’s like, “Whoa.” It’s like the G-force pulls you back.
Yeah. It’s like, “Whoa.” It’s like the G-force pulls you back.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Kimbal Musk
So I was like, “Okay, this is going to be great. This is going to be an interesting… We are going to create something interesting here.” I think the real transformative thing for Tesla was the Model 3 when we were able to get the price down for the world.
So I was like, “Okay, this is going to be great. This is going to be an interesting… We are going to create something interesting here.” I think the real transformative thing for Tesla was the Model 3 when we were able to get the price down for the world.
Lex Fridman
And that was also one of the most challenging periods…
And that was also one of the most challenging periods…
Kimbal Musk
Oh my God.
Oh my God.
Lex Fridman
… For Tesla for you.
… For Tesla for you.
Kimbal Musk
We were borderline bankrupt like two or three times that year. And everyone was hating on us about whether we’d get that done. The Model 3 today is incredibly affordable car, like a 300 bucks a month kind of lease and $3,000 down. That’s where you get the scale. That’s where you get people who… And by the way, it’s a great car. It’s even a better Model 3 now than it was five years ago. We don’t function the way car companies function. We function more like how an iPhone company or how Apple works. So our Model 3 today this year is better than last year. It’s like it’s way better and we just keep getting better.
We were borderline bankrupt like two or three times that year. And everyone was hating on us about whether we’d get that done. The Model 3 today is incredibly affordable car, like a 300 bucks a month kind of lease and $3,000 down. That’s where you get the scale. That’s where you get people who… And by the way, it’s a great car. It’s even a better Model 3 now than it was five years ago. We don’t function the way car companies function. We function more like how an iPhone company or how Apple works. So our Model 3 today this year is better than last year. It’s like it’s way better and we just keep getting better.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and the software is a fundamental part of the car and the software keeps improving.
Yeah, and the software is a fundamental part of the car and the software keeps improving.
Kimbal Musk
Exactly. And we upload over the air.
Exactly. And we upload over the air.
Lex Fridman
Which was one of the things that people don’t often acknowledge, it’s over the air updates. It’s like a revolutionary thing. It’s not just the autopilot. To me, it’s like the over the updates, is even bigger thing than on the autopilot, at least in this moment of history because you basically turned a car into the iPhone.
Which was one of the things that people don’t often acknowledge, it’s over the air updates. It’s like a revolutionary thing. It’s not just the autopilot. To me, it’s like the over the updates, is even bigger thing than on the autopilot, at least in this moment of history because you basically turned a car into the iPhone.
Kimbal Musk
Exactly. It’s an iPhone with wheels. But actually talking about autopilot, right after this interview, I’m going to go test out the latest Model 3.
Exactly. It’s an iPhone with wheels. But actually talking about autopilot, right after this interview, I’m going to go test out the latest Model 3.
Lex Fridman
You’re going to get driven around by a robot.
You’re going to get driven around by a robot.
Kimbal Musk
I’m going to get driven around by the car. I’m going to say, “I want to go to this barbecue joint. Take me there and park me there.” And I’m going to see how it is. And this is the latest Model 3 that we have out into production. Anyone can buy it. And it’s super affordable. And it’s like, “Okay. Full stop driving is a journey. It’s not like there’s a destination. It’s a journey forever. So let’s see where we are on the journey today.”
I’m going to get driven around by the car. I’m going to say, “I want to go to this barbecue joint. Take me there and park me there.” And I’m going to see how it is. And this is the latest Model 3 that we have out into production. Anyone can buy it. And it’s super affordable. And it’s like, “Okay. Full stop driving is a journey. It’s not like there’s a destination. It’s a journey forever. So let’s see where we are on the journey today.”
Lex Fridman
And there’s been a bit of a push and pull between you and Elon in terms of levels of optimism about deadlines and so on, timelines about when we’ll arrive at the destination. I like that you said it’s a journey. For Elon, there’s a destination, right?
And there’s been a bit of a push and pull between you and Elon in terms of levels of optimism about deadlines and so on, timelines about when we’ll arrive at the destination. I like that you said it’s a journey. For Elon, there’s a destination, right?
Kimbal Musk
Exactly.
Exactly.
Lex Fridman
And that destination is tomorrow or yesterday.
And that destination is tomorrow or yesterday.
Kimbal Musk
I think that’s a really good insight. I actually live with this concept of a growth mindset versus a fixed mindset. And it’s a philosophical term where fixed mindset is about the destination and a growth mindset is about learning on the journey. And I think that I’m a happier person because I take that learning on the journey approach, whereas it’s really frustrating if you’re always, it has to be about the destination every time.
I think that’s a really good insight. I actually live with this concept of a growth mindset versus a fixed mindset. And it’s a philosophical term where fixed mindset is about the destination and a growth mindset is about learning on the journey. And I think that I’m a happier person because I take that learning on the journey approach, whereas it’s really frustrating if you’re always, it has to be about the destination every time.
Lex Fridman
The nice thing about destination, at least from my personal perspective as a programmer engineer, is it puts a little fire under you to get shit done.
The nice thing about destination, at least from my personal perspective as a programmer engineer, is it puts a little fire under you to get shit done.
Kimbal Musk
That’s true.
That’s true.
Lex Fridman
If there’s a clear deadline of a destination, you feel the anxiety of it.
If there’s a clear deadline of a destination, you feel the anxiety of it.
Kimbal Musk
I would say that I still do that, but I call those forcing functions instead of destinations…
I would say that I still do that, but I call those forcing functions instead of destinations…
Lex Fridman
That’s true.
That’s true.
Kimbal Musk
… Because you’re just forcing people to crank on some code or cookbook or whatever because you have a date. And oftentimes there’s reason. It’s 20th anniversary, you wanted to get the cookbook out. We have a reason we didn’t make this up out of thin air. And so yeah, that does push you, but just because we have the cookbook doesn’t mean it’s a destination. It means it was a forcing function to get it out there. Now we’re on the journey.
… Because you’re just forcing people to crank on some code or cookbook or whatever because you have a date. And oftentimes there’s reason. It’s 20th anniversary, you wanted to get the cookbook out. We have a reason we didn’t make this up out of thin air. And so yeah, that does push you, but just because we have the cookbook doesn’t mean it’s a destination. It means it was a forcing function to get it out there. Now we’re on the journey.
SpaceX
Lex Fridman
Speaking of journeys, I have to ask you about SpaceX. The journey that all of humanity [inaudible 01:40:00]
Speaking of journeys, I have to ask you about SpaceX. The journey that all of humanity [inaudible 01:40:00]
Kimbal Musk
Seriously. Talk about a journey. That is incredible.
Seriously. Talk about a journey. That is incredible.
Lex Fridman
It’s an interesting moment in the history of humanity that perhaps hopefully we’ll become a multi-planetary species. But SpaceX is also a company. You invested in SpaceX, you were side by side with Elon through the highs and the lows, through the lows and the highs. So what were some memorable challenges? What were some low points…
It’s an interesting moment in the history of humanity that perhaps hopefully we’ll become a multi-planetary species. But SpaceX is also a company. You invested in SpaceX, you were side by side with Elon through the highs and the lows, through the lows and the highs. So what were some memorable challenges? What were some low points…
Kimbal Musk
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
… From the history of SpaceX?
… From the history of SpaceX?
Kimbal Musk
One of the hardest times in SpaceX was we were in the mid-Pacific in Kwajalein and my brother had sold PayPal. He’d done well financially. But in the rocket world, that money goes away really quickly. And we were in this military base in Kwajalein and I think it was the second rocket that blew up, I’m not sure. But we didn’t have infinite resources. I certainly didn’t have the resources. I’m there to support, brotherly support. So every rocket launch was do or die, and the first one had blown up. And so the second one, I think it was the second one, blew up. And it was so depressing. It was just like, “Ugh.” There’s nowhere to go. There’s no distraction. You’re on this military base. You don’t really socialize. It was just, we were all together. And I had gotten to know… For me, I’m not part of the team, I’m just there for emotional support or whatever, because it’s cool.
One of the hardest times in SpaceX was we were in the mid-Pacific in Kwajalein and my brother had sold PayPal. He’d done well financially. But in the rocket world, that money goes away really quickly. And we were in this military base in Kwajalein and I think it was the second rocket that blew up, I’m not sure. But we didn’t have infinite resources. I certainly didn’t have the resources. I’m there to support, brotherly support. So every rocket launch was do or die, and the first one had blown up. And so the second one, I think it was the second one, blew up. And it was so depressing. It was just like, “Ugh.” There’s nowhere to go. There’s no distraction. You’re on this military base. You don’t really socialize. It was just, we were all together. And I had gotten to know… For me, I’m not part of the team, I’m just there for emotional support or whatever, because it’s cool.
So I got to know a couple of people locally and got to know this one guy who had a mobile home, best view in the world, but it’s just a mobile home with a patch of grass next to it. And I was just desperate to find food that wasn’t from the cafeteria because this is the worst food you can imagine. And I met him and he showed me this little tiny little grocery store, which had a few things like canned tomatoes. And this is, again, your middle of nowhere. It’s just nothing fresh. And I made this dish that was a version of an Italian version of chili, just baked beans and sweating onions and then tomatoes. And it was a big pot of food. It’s a group of people. We didn’t even have a table. And we just put the big pot in the middle and we had our little paper plates and we took a scoop as we needed it.
And it was… Do we need the gathering place of food brings people together in the most difficult times, and it was one of my favorite memories because I was able to bring my gift to this group of incredible people that their hearts were broken. And to sit there and share a meal and feel the life kind come back into us and by the end of the night, we’re actually having a good time.
Lex Fridman
What a fascinating contrast of rockets representing the peak accomplishment of human beings as a society and then returning to the thing that is the foundation of human society, which is that communal experience.
What a fascinating contrast of rockets representing the peak accomplishment of human beings as a society and then returning to the thing that is the foundation of human society, which is that communal experience.
Kimbal Musk
That communal, vulnerable connection. Like we mentioned vulnerability earlier. The most vulnerable place, actually that’s when you have some of your most beautiful meals.
That communal, vulnerable connection. Like we mentioned vulnerability earlier. The most vulnerable place, actually that’s when you have some of your most beautiful meals.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, the descendants of apes gathering around some baked beans after watching a rocket explode.
Yeah, the descendants of apes gathering around some baked beans after watching a rocket explode.
Hope for the future
Kimbal Musk
Right.
Right.
Lex Fridman
What gives you hope about the future of this whole thing we’ve got going on, humanity?
What gives you hope about the future of this whole thing we’ve got going on, humanity?
Kimbal Musk
If you look at how things have changed over the past, say, 50 years, you can clearly say, “Oh, wow. Poverty rates have gone down, infant mortality has gone down dramatically. All these things have gone down a lot.” So if you look at it on a daily basis, you can tell that life is very dramatic, whether it’s something’s blowing up on X or from the newspapers or whatever, and you can really get caught up into it. But if you look back over the past few decades, things are getting better. And at the fundamental level, are less people hungry? Are there is war going on? Of course, but are there less wars? Yes. And so I think if we all just step back a little bit, it’s less about hope. It’s more perspective and reflection. And if I do see a problem, like in case of the obesity epidemic, I work really hard to help with that. Our nonprofit’s called Big Green and we work with 150 nonprofits around the country to help Americans grow food again, get connected to their food because I really believe growing food changes your life.
If you look at how things have changed over the past, say, 50 years, you can clearly say, “Oh, wow. Poverty rates have gone down, infant mortality has gone down dramatically. All these things have gone down a lot.” So if you look at it on a daily basis, you can tell that life is very dramatic, whether it’s something’s blowing up on X or from the newspapers or whatever, and you can really get caught up into it. But if you look back over the past few decades, things are getting better. And at the fundamental level, are less people hungry? Are there is war going on? Of course, but are there less wars? Yes. And so I think if we all just step back a little bit, it’s less about hope. It’s more perspective and reflection. And if I do see a problem, like in case of the obesity epidemic, I work really hard to help with that. Our nonprofit’s called Big Green and we work with 150 nonprofits around the country to help Americans grow food again, get connected to their food because I really believe growing food changes your life.
And so, “Okay, let’s go do that.” So I’ll help out where I think we really can make a difference. But if you step back a little, things are actually getting better. It’s just a bumpy ride.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and for those of us watching all of this, I think I would love to see more celebrating of the people that are helping, the people that have found their way of helping and just celebrating those people.
Yeah, and for those of us watching all of this, I think I would love to see more celebrating of the people that are helping, the people that have found their way of helping and just celebrating those people.
Kimbal Musk
Yeah. I would also, actually that’s a really nice point. I have learned that you really want to celebrate your successes because even in the greater scheme of things, I’ve learned this in the startup world where you are constantly facing death. Why should you even exist? Do your customers want your product or whatever? And then something will happen where you’re like, “Wow, we really nailed that. That’s really great.” Or we got a product released or got some good kudos from something, right? Everyone, we’re going to go celebrate. And actually everyone’s still like, “No, no, we’ve got all these other problems.” Nope, we’re going to go celebrate and then we’ll go back to the problems. But if you don’t do that, then it starts building on this kind of… You never really get to celebrate.
Yeah. I would also, actually that’s a really nice point. I have learned that you really want to celebrate your successes because even in the greater scheme of things, I’ve learned this in the startup world where you are constantly facing death. Why should you even exist? Do your customers want your product or whatever? And then something will happen where you’re like, “Wow, we really nailed that. That’s really great.” Or we got a product released or got some good kudos from something, right? Everyone, we’re going to go celebrate. And actually everyone’s still like, “No, no, we’ve got all these other problems.” Nope, we’re going to go celebrate and then we’ll go back to the problems. But if you don’t do that, then it starts building on this kind of… You never really get to celebrate.
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm. And be grateful. I think this is a good time to go celebrate the very fact that we’re alive today. We get to live and enjoy this incredible life, the two of us, and have this great conversation, and we’ll get to celebrate over some scrambled eggs.
Mm-hmm. And be grateful. I think this is a good time to go celebrate the very fact that we’re alive today. We get to live and enjoy this incredible life, the two of us, and have this great conversation, and we’ll get to celebrate over some scrambled eggs.
Kimbal Musk
Beautiful.
Beautiful.
Lex Fridman
I’m going to hold you to it.
I’m going to hold you to it.
Kimbal Musk
Beautiful.
Beautiful.
Lex Fridman
Kimbal, thank you so much for talking today.
Kimbal, thank you so much for talking today.
Kimbal Musk
Thank you for having me.
Thank you for having me.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Kimbal Musk. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you some words from Anthony Bourdain. Your body is not a temple, it’s an amusement park. Enjoy the ride. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Kimbal Musk. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you some words from Anthony Bourdain. Your body is not a temple, it’s an amusement park. Enjoy the ride. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Yann Lecun: Meta AI, Open Source, Limits of LLMs, AGI & the Future of AI | Lex Fridman Podcast #416
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #416 with Yann LeCun.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
At this moment of rapid AI development, this happens to be somewhat a controversial position, and so it’s been fun seeing Yann get into a lot of intense and fascinating discussions online as we do in this very conversation. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Yann LeCun. You’ve had some strong statements, technical statements about the future of artificial intelligence throughout your career actually, but recently as well, you’ve said that autoregressive LLMs are not the way we’re going to make progress towards superhuman intelligence. These are the large language models like GPT-4, like Llama 2 and 3 soon and so on. How do they work and why are they not going to take us all the way?
And then there is another tidbit or fact that I think is very interesting. Those LLMs are trained on enormous amounts of texts, basically, the entirety of all publicly available texts on the internet, right? That’s typically on the order of 10 to the 13 tokens. Each token is typically two bytes, so that’s two 10 to the 13 bytes as training data. It would take you or me 170,000 years to just read through this at eight hours a day. So it seems like an enormous amount of knowledge that those systems can accumulate, but then you realize it’s really not that much data. If you talk to developmental psychologists and they tell you a four-year-old has been awake for 16,000 hours in his or her life, and the amount of information that has reached the visual cortex of that child in four years is about 10 to 15 bytes.
And you can compute this by estimating that the optical nerve carry about 20 megabytes per second roughly, and so 10 to the 15 bytes for a four-year-old versus two times 10 to the 13 bytes for 170,000 years worth of reading. What that tells you is that through sensory input, we see a lot more information than we do through language, and that despite our intuition, most of what we learn and most of our knowledge is through our observation and interaction with the real world, not through language. Everything that we learn in the first few years of life, and certainly everything that animals learn has nothing to do with language.
So a lot of my colleagues who are more interested in things like computer vision are really on that camp that AI needs to be embodied essentially. And then other people coming from the NLP side or maybe some other motivation don’t necessarily agree with that, and philosophers are split as well, and the complexity of the world is hard to imagine. It’s hard to represent all the complexities that we take completely for granted in the real world that we don’t even imagine require intelligence, right?
This is the old Moravec paradox, from the pioneer of robotics, hence Moravec, who said, how is it that with computers, it seems to be easy to do high-level complex tasks like playing chess and solving integrals and doing things like that, whereas the thing we take for granted that we do every day, like, I don’t know, learning to drive a car or grabbing an object, we can’t do with computers, and we have LLMs that can pass the bar exam, so they must be smart, but then they can’t learn to drive in 20 hours like any 17-year old, they can’t learn to clear out the dinner table and fill up the dishwasher like any 10-year old can learn in one shot. Why is that? What are we missing? What type of learning or reasoning architecture or whatever are we missing that basically prevent us from having level five sort of in cars and domestic robots?
And then you just feed that to the LLM in addition to the text, and you just expect the LLM, during training, to be able to use those representations to help make decisions. I mean, there’s been work along those lines for quite a long time and now, you see those systems. I mean there are LLMs that have some vision extension, but they’re basically hacks in the sense that those things are not trained to really understand the world. They’re not trained with video, for example. They don’t really understand intuitive physics, at least not at the moment.
So what it’s going to do is produce a probability distribution of all the possible words in a dictionary. In fact, it doesn’t predict words. It predicts tokens that are kind of subword units, and so it’s easy to handle the uncertainty in the prediction there because there is only a finite number of possible words in the dictionary, and you can just compute a distribution over them. Then what the system does is that it picks a word from that distribution. Of course, there’s a higher chance of picking words that have a higher probability within that distribution. So you sample from that distribution to actually produce a word, and then you shift that word into the input, and so that allows the system not to predict the second word, and once you do this, you shift it into the input, et cetera.
That’s called autoregressive prediction, which is why those LLMs should be called autoregressive LLMs, but we just call them LLMs, and there is a difference between this kind of process and a process by which before producing a word… When you and I talk, you and I are bilingual, we think about what we’re going to say, and it’s relatively independent of the language in which we’re going to say. When we talk about, I don’t know, let’s say a mathematical concept or something, the kind of thinking that we’re doing and the answer that we’re planning to produce is not linked to whether we’re going to see it in French or Russian or English.
LLMs don’t do that. They just produce one word after the other instinctively if you want. It’s a bit like the subconscious actions where you’re distracted, you’re doing something, you’re completely concentrated, and someone comes to you and asks you a question and you kind of answer the question. You don’t have time to think about the answer, but the answer is easy. So you don’t need to pay attention. You sort of respond automatically. That’s kind of what an LLM does. It doesn’t think about its answer really. It retrieves it because it’s accumulated a lot of knowledge. So it can retrieve some things, but it’s going to just spit out one token after the other without planning the answer.
So one model really is here is my idea of the state of the world at time, T, here is an action I might take. What is the predicted state of the world at time, T+1? Now that state of the world does not need to represent everything about the world, it just needs to represent enough that’s relevant for this planning of the action, but not necessarily all the details. Now, here is the problem. You’re not going to be able to do this with generative models. So a generative model has trained on video, and we’ve tried to do this for 10 years, you take a video, show a system, a piece of video, and then ask you to predict the reminder of the video, basically predict what’s going to happen.
We do not know how to represent distributions over high-dimensional, continuous spaces in ways that are useful. And there lies the main issue, and the reason we can do this is because the world is incredibly more complicated and richer in terms of information than text. Text is discrete, video is high-dimensional and continuous. A lot of details in this. So if I take a video of this room and the video is a camera panning around, there is no way I can predict everything that’s going to be in the room as I pan around. The system cannot predict what’s going to be in the room as the camera is panning. Maybe it’s going to predict this is a room where there’s a light and there is a wall and things like that. It can’t predict what the painting of the wall looks like or what the texture of the couch looks like. Certainly not the texture of the carpet. So there’s no way I can predict all those details.
So one way to possibly handle this, which we’ve been working for a long time, is to have a model that has what’s called a latent variable. And the latent variable is fed to a neural net, and it’s supposed to represent all the information about the world that you don’t perceive yet, and that you need to augment the system for the prediction to do a good job at predicting pixels, including the fine texture of the carpet and the couch and the painting on the wall.
That has been a complete failure essentially. And we’ve tried lots of things. We tried just straight neural nets, we tried GANs, we tried VAEs, all kinds of regularized auto encoders. We tried many things. We also tried those kinds of methods to learn good representations of images or video that could then be used as input to, for example, an image classification system. That also has basically failed. All the systems that attempt to predict missing parts of an image or video from a corrupted version of it, basically, so take an image or a video, corrupt it or transform it in some way, and then try to reconstruct the complete video or image from the corrupted version, and then hope that internally, the system will develop good representations of images that you can use for object recognition, segmentation, whatever it is. That has been essentially a complete failure and it works really well for text. That’s the principle that is used for LLMs, right?
And I call this a JEPA, so that means joint embedding predictive architecture because this joint embedding and there is this predictor that predicts the representation of the good guy from the bad guy. And the big question is how do you train something like this? And until five years ago or six years ago, we didn’t have particularly good answers for how you train those things except for one, called contrastive learning, where the idea of contrastive learning is you take a pair of images that are, again, an image and a corrupted version or degraded version somehow or transformed version of the original one, and you train the predicted representation to be the same as that. If you only do this, this system collapses. It basically completely ignores the input and produces representations that are constant. So the contrastive methods avoid this, and those things have been around since the early ’90s, I had a paper on this in 1993, is you also show pairs of images that you know are different, and then you push away the representations from each other. So you say, not only do representations of things that we know are the same should be the same or should be similar, but representation of things that we know are different should be different. And that prevents the collapse, but it has some limitation. And there’s a whole bunch of techniques that have appeared over the last six, seven years that can revive this type of method, some of them from FAIR, some of them from Google and other places, but there are limitations to those contrastive methods.
What has changed in the last three, four years is now we have methods that are non-contrastive. So they don’t require those negative contrastive samples of images that we know are different. You turn them on you with images that are different versions or different views of the same thing, and you rely on some other tricks to prevent the system from collapsing. And we have half a dozen different methods for this now.
So it lifts the level of abstraction of the representation. If you think about this, this is something we do absolutely all the time. Whenever we describe a phenomenon, we describe it at a particular level of abstraction. We don’t always describe every natural phenomenon in terms of quantum field theory. That would be impossible. So we have multiple levels of abstraction to describe what happens in the world, starting from quantum field theory, to atomic theory and molecules and chemistry, materials and all the way up to concrete objects in the real world and things like that. So we can’t just only model everything at the lowest level. And that’s what the idea of JEPA is really about, learn abstract representation in a self-supervised manner, and you can do it hierarchically as well. So that, I think, is an essential component of an intelligent system. And in language, we can get away without doing this because language is already to some level abstract and already has eliminated a lot of information that is not predictable. And so we can get away without doing the joint embedding, without lifting the abstraction level and by directly predicting words.
And the problem with this is that we might improve our language models by feeding them images, but we’re not going to get to the level of even the intelligence or level of understanding of the world of a cat or a dog, which doesn’t have language. They don’t have language and they understand the world much better than any LLM. They can plan really complex actions and imagine the result of a bunch of actions. How do we get machines to learn that before we combine that with language? Obviously if we combine this with language, this is going to be a winner, but before that, we have to focus on how do we get systems to learn how the world works?
Sometimes a predictor is very simple, sometimes it doesn’t exist, but train a predictor to predict a representation of the first uncorrupted input from the corrupted input. But you only train the second branch. You only train the part of the network that is fed with the corrupted input. The other network, you don’t train. But since they share the same weight, when you modify the first one, it also modifies the second one. And with various tricks, you can prevent the system from collapsing with the collapse of the type I was explaining before, where the system basically ignores the input. So that works very well. The two techniques we developed at FAIR, DINO and I-JEPA work really well for that.
So that’s the I-JEPA. It doesn’t need to know that it’s an image for example, because the only thing it needs to know is how to do this masking. Whereas with DINO, you need to know it’s an image because you need to do things like geometry transformation and blurring and things like that, that are really image specific. A more recent version of this that we have is called V-JEPA. So it’s basically the same idea as I-JEPA except it’s applied to video. So now you take a whole video and you mask a whole chunk of it. And what we mask is actually kind of a temporal tube, so a whole segment of each frame in the video over the entire video.
So if it’s a dash cam in a car and you know the angle of the wheel, you should be able to predict to some extent what’s going to happen to what you see. You’re not going to be able to predict all the details of objects that appear in the view obviously, but at a abstract representation level, you can probably predict what’s going to happen. So now what you have is a internal model that says, “Here is my idea of the state of the world at time T. Here is an action I’m taking. Here is a prediction of the state of the world at time T plus one, T plus delta T, T plus two seconds,” whatever it is. If you have a model of this type, you can use it for planning. So now you can do what LMS cannot do, which is planning what you’re going to do. So as you arrive at a particular outcome or satisfy a particular objective.
So you can have a number of objectives. I can predict that if I have an object like this and I open my hand, it’s going to fall. And if I push it with a particular force on the table, it’s going to move. If I push the table itself, it’s probably not going to move with the same force. So we have this internal model of the world in our mind, which allows us to plan sequences of actions to arrive at a particular goal. And so now if you have this world model, we can imagine a sequence of actions, predict what the outcome of the sequence of action is going to be, measure to what extent the final state satisfies a particular objective, like moving the bottle to the left of the table and then plan a sequence of actions that will minimize this objective, at runtime.
We’re not talking about learning, we’re talking about inference time, so this is planning, really. And in optimal control, this is a very classical thing. It’s called model predictive control. You have a model of the system you want to control that can predict the sequence of states corresponding to a sequence of commands. And you’re planning a sequence of commands so that according to your role model, the end state of the system will satisfy an objectives that you fix. This is the way rocket trajectories have been planned since computers have been around, so since the early ’60s essentially.
Okay, now I have another sub goal go down on the street. Well that means going to the elevator, going down the elevator, walk out the street. How do I go to the elevator? I have to stand up from my chair, open the door in my office, go to the elevator, push the button. How do I get up for my chair? You can imagine going down, all the way down, to basically what amounts to millisecond by millisecond muscle control. And obviously you’re not going plan your entire trip from New York to Paris in terms of millisecond by millisecond muscle control. First, that would be incredibly expensive, but it will also be completely impossible because you don’t know all the conditions of what’s going to happen, how long it’s going to take to catch a taxi or to go to the airport with traffic. I mean, you would have to know exactly the condition of everything to be able to do this planning and you don’t have the information. So you have to do this hierarchical planning so that you can start acting and then sort of replanning as you go. And nobody really knows how to do this in AI. Nobody knows how to train a system to learn the appropriate multiple levels of representation so that hierarchical planning works.
So the idea that you take a piece of text, you corrupt it, and then you train some gigantic neural net to reconstruct the parts that are missing. That has produced an enormous amount of benefits. It allowed us to create systems that understand language, systems that can translate hundreds of languages in any direction, systems that are multilingual, so it’s a single system that can be trained to understand hundreds of languages and translate in any direction, and produce summaries and then answer questions and produce text.
And then there’s a special case of it, which is the auto regressive trick where you constrain the system to not elaborate a representation of the text from looking at the entire text, but only predicting a word from the words that are come before. And you do this by constraining the architecture of the network, and that’s what you can build an auto aggressive LLM from.
So there was a surprise many years ago with what’s called decoder only LLM. So since systems of this type that are just trying to produce words from the previous one and the fact that when you scale them up, they tend to really understand more about language. When you train them on lots of data, you make them really big. That was a surprise and that surprise occurred quite a while back, with work from Google, Meta, OpenAI, et cetera, going back to the GPT kind of work, general pre-trained transformers.
The conference I co-founded 14 years ago is called International Conference on Learning Representations. That’s the entire issue that deep learning is dealing with, and it’s been my obsession for almost 40 years now. So learning representation is really the thing. For the longest time, we could only do this with supervised learning, and then we started working on what we used to call unsupervised learning and revived the idea of unsupervised running in the early 2000s with your [inaudible 00:56:58] and Jeff Hinton. Then discovered that supervised running actually works pretty well if you can collect enough data. And so the whole idea of unsupervised, self supervised running kind of took a backseat for a bit, and then I tried to revive it in a big way starting in 2014, basically when we started FAIR and really pushing for finding new methods to do self supervised running both for text and for images and for video and audio.
And some of that work has been incredibly successful. I mean, the reason why we have multilingual translation system, things to do, content moderation on Meta, for example, on Facebook, that are multilingual, that understand whether a piece of text is hate speech not or something, is due to that progress using self supervised running for NLP, combining this with transformer architectures and blah, blah, blah.
But that’s the big success of self supervised running. We had similar success in speech recognition, a system called WAVE2VEC, which is also a joint embedding architecture, by the way, trained with contrastive running. And that system also can produce speech recognition systems that are multilingual with mostly unlabeled data and only need a few minutes of labeled data to actually do speech recognition, that’s amazing. We have systems now based on those combination of ideas that can do real time translation of hundreds of languages into each other, speech to speech.
And tried and tried and failed and failed, with generative models, with models that predict pixels. We could not get them to learn good representations of images. We could not get them to learn good representations of videos. And we tried many times, we published lots of papers on it, where they kind of sort of work, but not really great. They started working, we abandoned this idea of predicting every pixel and basically just doing the joint embedding and predicting and representation space, that works. So there’s ample evidence that we’re not going to be able to learn good representations of the real world using generative model. So I’m telling people, everybody’s talking about generative AI. If you’re really interested in human level AI, abandon the idea of generative AI.
And so the system will behave properly on the prompts that has been either trained, pre-trained, or fine-tuned, but then there is an entire space of things that it cannot possibly have been trained on because the number is gigantic. So whatever training the system has been subject to produce appropriate answers, you can break it by finding out a prompt that will be outside of the set of prompts that’s been trained on, or things that are similar, and then it will just spew complete nonsense.
The type of reasoning that takes place in LLM is very, very primitive, and the reason you can tell is primitive is because the amount of computation that is spent per token produced is constant. So if you ask a question and that question has an answer in a given number of token, the amount of computation devoted to computing that answer can be exactly estimated. It’s the size of the prediction network with its 36 layers or 92 layers or whatever it is multiply by number of tokens, that’s it. And so essentially, it doesn’t matter if the question being asked is simple to answer, complicated to answer, impossible to answer because it’s a decidable or something, the amount of computation the system will be able to devote to the answer is constant or is proportional to number of token produced in the answer. This is not the way we work, the way we reason is that when we’re faced with a complex problem or a complex question, we spend more time trying to solve it and answer it because it’s more difficult.
It’s the same difference as the difference between what psychologists call system one and system two in humans, so system one is the type of task that you can accomplish without deliberately consciously think about how you do them, you just do them, you’ve done them enough that you can just do it subconsciously without thinking about them. If you’re an experienced driver, you can drive without really thinking about it and you can talk to someone at the same time or listen to the radio. If you are a very experienced chess player, you can play against a non- experienced chess player without really thinking either, you just recognize the pattern and you play. That’s system one, so all the things that you do instinctively without really having to deliberately plan and think about it.
And then there is all the tasks where you need to plan, so if you are a not too experienced chess player or you are experienced where you play against another experienced chess player, you think about all kinds of options, you think about it for a while and you are much better if you have time to think about it than you are if you play blitz with limited time. So this type of deliberate planning, which uses your internal world model, that’s system two, this is what LMS currently cannot do. How do we get them to do this? How do we build a system that can do this kind of planning or reasoning that devotes more resources to complex problems than to simple problems? And it’s not going to be a regressive prediction of tokens, it’s going to be more something akin to inference of little variables in what used to be called probabilistic models or graphical models and things of that type.
Basically, the principle is like this, the prompt is like observed variables, and what the model does, is that basically, it can measure to what extent an answer is a good answer for a prompt. So think of it as some gigantic neural net, but it’s got only one output, and that output is a scaler number, which is, let’s say, zero, if the answer is a good answer for the question and a large number, if the answer is not a good answer for the question. Imagine you had this model, if you had such a model, you could use it to produce good answers, the way you would do is, produce the prompt and then search through the space of possible answers for one that minimizes that number, that’s called an energy based model.
Now we have an abstract representation of the thought of the answer, representation of the answer, we feed that to basically an autoregressive decoder, which can be very simple, that turns this into a text that expresses this thought. So that, in my opinion, is the blueprint of future data systems, they will think about their answer, plan their answer by optimization before turning it into text, and that is turning complete.
How do you train a system like this at a completely general level, is you show it pairs of X and Ys that are compatible, a question and the corresponding answer, and you train the parameters of the big neural net inside to produce zero. Now that doesn’t completely work because the system might decide, well, I’m just going to say zero for everything, so now you have to have a process to make sure that for a wrong Y, the energy would be larger than zero. And there you have two options, one is contrastive method, so contrastive method is, you show an X and a bad Y and you tell the system, well, give a high energy to this, push up the energy, change the weights in the neural net that confuse the energy so that it goes up. So that’s contrasting methods.
The problem with this is, if the space of Y is large, the number of such contrasting samples are going to have to show is gigantic. But people do this, they do this when you train a system with RLHF, basically what you’re training is what’s called a reward model, which is basically an objective function that tells you whether an answer is good or bad, and that’s basically exactly what this is. So we already do this to some extent, we’re just not using it for inference, we’re just using it for training.
There is another set of methods which are non-contrastive, and I prefer those, and those non-contrastive methods basically say, the energy function needs to have low energy on pairs of XYs that are compatible that come from your training set. How do you make sure that the energy is going to be higher everywhere else? And the way you do this is by having a regularizer, a criterion, a term in your cost function that basically minimizes the volume of space that can take low energy. And the precise way to do this is all kinds of different specific ways to do this depending on the architecture, but that’s the basic principle. So that if you push down the energy function for particular regions in the XY space, it will automatically go up in other places because there’s only a limited volume of space that can take low energy by the construction of the system or by the regularizing function.
Now, indirectly, that gives a high probability to sequences of words that are good and low probability to sequences of words that are bad, but it’s very indirect. And it’s not obvious why this actually works at all because you’re not doing it on the joint probability of all the symbols in a sequence, you factorize that probability in terms of conditional probabilities over successive tokens.
If you want to adjust your world model while you are operating in the world or your objective function, that is basically in the realm of RL, this is what RL deals with to some extent, so adjust your word model. And the way to adjust your word model even in advance is to explore parts of the space where you know that your world model is inaccurate, that’s called curiosity basically, or play. When you play, you explore parts of the space that you don’t want to do for real because it might be dangerous, but you can adjust your world model without killing yourself basically. So that’s what you want to use RL for, when it comes time to learning a particular task, you already have all the good representations, you already have your world model, but you need to adjust it for the situation at hand, that’s when you use RL.
It’s very similar to the objective I was talking about earlier for planning, except now it’s not used for planning, it’s used for fine-tuning your system. I think it would be much more efficient to use it for planning, but currently, it’s used to fine tune the parameters of the system. There’s several ways to do this, some of them are supervised, you just ask a human person like, what is a good answer for this? Then you just type the answer. There’s lots of ways that those systems are being adjusted.
And so you can ask two questions, the first question is, is it possible to produce an AI system that is not biased? And the answer is, absolutely not. And it’s not because of technological challenges, although they are technological challenges to that, it’s because bias is in the eye of the beholder. Different people may have different ideas about what constitutes bias for a lot of things, there are facts that are indisputable, but there are a lot of opinions or things that can be expressed in different ways. And so you cannot have an unbiased system, that’s just an impossibility.
And so what’s the answer to this? And the answer is the same answer that we found in liberal democracy about the press, the press needs to be free and diverse. We have free speech for a good reason, is because we don’t want all of our information to come from a unique source because that’s opposite to the whole idea of democracy and progressive ideas and even science. In science, people have to argue for different opinions and science makes progress when people disagree and they come up with an answer and consensus forms, and it’s true in all democracies around the world.
There is a future which is already happening where every single one of our interaction with the digital world will be mediated by AI systems, AI assistance. We’re going to have smart glasses, you can already buy them from Meta, the Ray-Ban Meta where you can talk to them and they are connected with an LLM and you can get answers on any question you have. Or you can be looking at a monument and there is a camera in the glasses you can ask it like, what can you tell me about this building or this monument? You can be looking at a menu in a foreign language, and I think we will translate it for you, or we can do real time translation if we speak different languages. So a lot of our interactions with the digital world are going to be mediated by those systems in the near future.
Increasingly, the search engines that we’re going to use are not going to be search engines, they’re going to be dialogue systems that we just ask a question and it will answer and then point you to perhaps appropriate reference for it. But here is the thing, we cannot afford those systems to come from a handful of companies on the west coast of the US because those systems will constitute the repository of all human knowledge, and we cannot have that be controlled by a small number of people. It has to be diverse for the same reason the press has to be diverse, so how do we get a diverse set of AI assistance? It’s very expensive and difficult to train a base model, a base LLM at the moment, in the future it might be something different, but at the moment, that’s an LLM. So only a few companies can do this properly.
And if some of those top systems are open source, anybody can use them, anybody can fine tune them. If we put in place some systems that allows any group of people, whether they are individual citizens, groups of citizens, government organizations, NGOs, companies, whatever, to take those open source AI systems and fine tune them for their own purpose on their own data, then we’re going to have a very large diversity of different AI systems that are specialized for all of those things.
I tell you, I talked to the French government quite a bit, and the French government will not accept that the digital diet of all their citizens be controlled by three companies on the west coast of the US. That’s just not acceptable, it’s a danger to democracy regardless of how well-intentioned those companies are, and it’s also a danger to local culture, to values, to language. I was talking with the founder of Infosys in India, he’s funding a project to fine tune Llama 2, the open source model produced by Meta, so that Llama 2 two speaks all 22 official languages in India, it is very important for people in India. I was talking to a former colleague of mine, Moustapha Cisse, who used to be a scientist at Fair and then moved back to Africa, created a research lab for Google in Africa and now has a new startup Co-Kera.
And what he’s trying to do, is basically have LLM that speak the local languages in Senegal so that people can have access to medical information because they don’t have access to doctors, it’s a very small number of doctors per capita in Senegal. You can’t have any of this unless you have open source platforms, so with open source platforms, you can have AI systems that are not only diverse in terms of political opinions or things of that-
A lot of companies want this. A lot of companies want this not just for their employees, but also for their customers, to take care of their customers. So the only way you’re going to have an AI industry, the only way you’re going to have AI systems that are not uniquely biased is if you have open source platforms on top of which any group can build specialized systems. So the direction of inevitable direction of history is that the vast majority of AI systems will be built on top of open source platforms.
In fact, nobody in the world, not even countries used bioweapons because most of the time they have no idea how to protect their own populations against it. So it’s too dangerous, actually, to ever use, and it’s, in fact, banned by international treaties. Chemical weapons is different. It’s also banned by treaties, but it’s the same problem. It’s difficult to use in situations that doesn’t turn against the perpetrators, but we could ask Elon Musk. I can give you a very precise list of instructions of how you build a rocket engine. Even if you have a team of 50 engineers that are really experienced building it, you’re still going to have to blow up a dozen of them before you get one that works. It’s the same with chemical weapons or bioweapons or things like this, it requires expertise in the real world that the LLM is not going to help you with.
Then the next step is going to be world models based on this type of idea training from video. There’s similar work at DeepMind also and taking place people, and also at UC Berkeley on world models and video. A lot of people are working on this. I think a lot of good ideas are appearing. My bet is that those systems are going to be JEPA light, they’re not going to be generative models, and we’ll see what the future will tell. There’s really good work, a gentleman called Danijar Hafner who is now DeepMind, who’s worked on models of this type that learn representations and then use them for planning or learning tasks by reinforcement training and a lot of work at Berkeley by Pieter Abbeel, Sergey Levine, a bunch of other people of that type I’m collaborating with actually in the context of some grants with my NYU hat.
Then collaboration is also through Meta ’cause the lab at Berkeley is associated with Meta in some way, so with fair. So I think it is very exciting. I haven’t been that excited about the direction of machine learning and AI since 10 years ago when Fairway was started. Before that, 30 years ago, we were working, oh, sorry, 35 on combination nets and the early days of neural nets. So I’m super excited because I see a path towards potentially human-level intelligence with systems that can understand the world, remember, plan, reason. There is some set of ideas to make progress there that might have a chance of working, and I’m really excited about this. What I like is that somewhat we get on to a good direction and perhaps succeed before my brain turns to a white sauce or before I need to retire.
Are we going to have systems that can reason and plan perhaps along the lines of objective-driven AI architectures that I described before? Yeah, but before we get this to work properly, it’s going to take a while. Before we get all those things to work together, and then on top of this, have systems that can learn hierarchical planning, hierarchical representations, systems that can be configured for a lot of different situation at hand, the way the human brain can, all of this is going to take at least a decade and probably much more because there are a lot of problems that we’re not seeing right now that we have not encountered, so we don’t know if there is an easy solution within this framework. So it’s not just around the corner. I’ve been hearing people for the last 12, 15 years claiming that AGI is just around the corner and being systematically wrong. I knew they were wrong when they were saying it. I called their bullshit.
It’s not going to be one effort, that it’s going to be lots of different people doing this, and some of them are going to succeed at making intelligent systems that are controllable and safe and have the right guardrails. If some other goes rogue, then we can use the good ones to go against the rogue ones. So it’s going to be my smart AI police against your rogue AI. So it’s not going to be like we’re going to be exposed to a single rogue AI that’s going to kill us all. That’s just not happening. Now, there is another fallacy, which is the fact that because the system is intelligent, it necessarily wants to take over. There is several arguments that make people scared of this, which I think are completely false as well.
So one of them is in nature, it seems to be that the more intelligent species otherwise end up dominating the other and even distinguishing the others sometimes by design, sometimes just by mistake. So there is thinking by which you say, “Well, if AI systems are more intelligent than us, surely they’re going to eliminate us, if not by design, simply because they don’t care about us,” and that’s just preposterous for a number of reasons. First reason is they’re not going to be a species. They’re not going to be a species that competes with us. They’re not going to have the desire to dominate because the desire to dominate is something that has to be hardwired into an intelligent system. It is hardwired in humans. It is hardwired in baboons, in chimpanzees, in wolves, not in orangutans. The species in which this desire to dominate or submit or attain status in other ways is specific to social species. Non-social species like orangutans don’t have it, and they are as smart as we are, almost, right?
Those are incredibly complex pieces of hardware that run at really high temperatures for 20 hours at a time sometimes, and we can fly halfway around the world on a two-engine jetliner at near the speed of sound. Like how incredible is this? It’s just unbelievable. Did we do this because we invented a general principle of how to make turbojets safe? No, it took decades to fine tune the design of those systems so that they were safe. Is there a separate group within General Electric or Snecma or whatever that is specialized in turbojet safety? No. The design is all about safety, because a better turbojet is also a safer turbojet, so a more reliable one. It’s the same for AI. Do you need specific provisions to make AI safe? No, you need to make better AI systems, and they will be safe because they are designed to be more useful and more controllable.
We’re still some distance away from completely autonomous level five driving, and we’re certainly very far away from having level five autonomous driving by a system that can train itself by driving 20 hours like any 17-year-old. So until we have, again, world models, systems that can train themselves to understand how the world works, we’re not going to have significant progress in robotics. So a lot of the people working on robotic hardware at the moment are betting or banking on the fact that AI is going to make sufficient progress towards that,
And so the question of planning is not just a question of planning physical actions. It could be planning actions to use tools for a dialogue system or for any kind of intelligence system. And there’s some work on this, but not a huge amount. Some work at fair, one called Toolformer, which was a couple years ago and some more recent work on planning, but I don’t think we have a good solution for any of that. Then there is the question of hierarchical planning. So the example I mentioned of planning a trip from New York to Paris, that’s hierarchical, but almost every action that we take involves hierarchical planning in some sense, and we really have absolutely no idea how to do this.
There’s zero demonstration of hierarchical planning in AI where the various levels of representations that are necessary have been learned. We can do two level hierarchical planning when we designed the two levels. So for example, you have a dog-like robot, you want it to go from the living room to the kitchen. You can plan a path that avoids the obstacle, and then you can send this to a lower level planner that figures out how to move the legs to follow that trajectories. So that works, but that two level planning is designed by hand.
We specify what the proper levels of abstraction, the representation at each level of abstraction have to be. How do you learn this? How do you learn that hierarchical representation of action plans? With [inaudible 02:37:21] and deep learning, we can train the system to learn hierarchical representations of percepts. What is the equivalent when what you’re trying to represent are action plans?
That’s actually a wonderful thing. So having machines that are smarter than us, that assist us in all of our tasks, our daily lives, whether it’s professional or personal, I think would be an absolutely wonderful thing. Because intelligence is the commodity that is most in demand. That’s really what I mean. All the mistakes that humanity makes is because of lack of intelligence really, or lack of knowledge, which is related. So making people smarter, we just can only be better. For the same reason that public education is a good thing and books are a good thing, and the internet is also a good thing, intrinsically and even social networks are a good thing if you run them properly.
It’s difficult, but you can. Because it helps the communication of information and knowledge and the transmission of knowledge. So AI is going to make humanity smarter. And the analogy I’ve been using is the fact that perhaps an equivalent event in the history of humanity to what might be provided by generalization of AI assistant is the invention of the printing press. It made everybody smarter, the fact that people could have access to books. Books were a lot cheaper than they were before, and so a lot more people had an incentive to learn to read, which wasn’t the case before.
And people became smarter. It enabled the enlightenment. There wouldn’t be an enlightenment without the printing press. It enabled philosophy, rationalism, escape from religious doctrine, democracy, science. And certainly without this, there wouldn’t have been the American Revolution or the French Revolution. And so we would still be under a feudal regimes perhaps. And so it completely transformed the world because people became smarter and learned about things. Now, it also created 200 years of essentially religious conflicts in Europe because the first thing that people read was the Bible and realized that perhaps there was a different interpretation of the Bible than what the priests were telling them. And so that created the Protestant movement and created the rift. And in fact, the Catholic Church didn’t like the idea of the printing press, but they had no choice. And so it had some bad effects and some good effects.
I don’t think anyone today would say that the invention of the printing press had a overall negative effect despite the fact that it created 200 years of religious conflicts in Europe. Now, compare this, and I thought I was very proud of myself to come up with this analogy, but realized someone else came with the same idea before me, compare this with what happened in the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman Empire banned the printing press for 200 years, and he didn’t ban it for all languages, only for Arabic. You could actually print books in Latin or Hebrew or whatever in the Ottoman Empire, just not in Arabic.
And I thought it was because the rulers just wanted to preserve the control over the population and the religious dogma and everything. But after talking with the UAE Minister of AI, Omar Al Olama, he told me no, there was another reason. And the other reason was that it was to preserve the corporation of calligraphers. There’s an art form, which is writing those beautiful Arabic poems or whatever, religious text in this thing. And it was a very powerful corporation of scribes basically that run a big chunk of the empire, and we couldn’t put them out of business. So they banned the printing press in part to protect that business.
Now, what’s the analogy for AI today? Who are we protecting by banning AI? Who are the people who are asking that AI be regulated to protect their jobs? And of course, it’s a real question of what is going to be the effect of a technological transformation like AI on the job market and the labor market? And there are economists who are much more expert at this than I am, but when I talk to them, they tell us we’re not going to run out of the job. This is not going to cause mass unemployment. This is just going to be gradual shift of different professions.
The professions that are going to be hot 10 or 15 years from now, we have no idea today what they’re going to be. The same way, if you go back 20 years in the past, who could have thought 20 years ago that the hottest job, even five, 10 years ago, was mobile app developer? Smartphones weren’t invented.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 2:18 – Limits of LLMs
- 13:54 – Bilingualism and thinking
- 17:46 – Video prediction
- 25:07 – JEPA (Joint-Embedding Predictive Architecture)
- 28:15 – JEPA vs LLMs
- 37:31 – DINO and I-JEPA
- 38:51 – V-JEPA
- 44:22 – Hierarchical planning
- 50:40 – Autoregressive LLMs
- 1:06:06 – AI hallucination
- 1:11:30 – Reasoning in AI
- 1:29:02 – Reinforcement learning
- 1:34:10 – Woke AI
- 1:43:48 – Open source
- 1:47:26 – AI and ideology
- 1:49:58 – Marc Andreesen
- 1:57:56 – Llama 3
- 2:04:20 – AGI
- 2:08:48 – AI doomers
- 2:24:38 – Joscha Bach
- 2:28:51 – Humanoid robots
- 2:38:00 – Hope for the future
Introduction
Yann LeCun
I see the danger of this concentration of power through proprietary AI systems as a much bigger danger than everything else. What works against this is people who think that for reasons of security, we should keep AI systems under lock and key because it’s too dangerous to put it in the hands of everybody. That would lead to a very bad future in which all of our information diet is controlled by a small number of companies who proprietary systems.
I see the danger of this concentration of power through proprietary AI systems as a much bigger danger than everything else. What works against this is people who think that for reasons of security, we should keep AI systems under lock and key because it’s too dangerous to put it in the hands of everybody. That would lead to a very bad future in which all of our information diet is controlled by a small number of companies who proprietary systems.
Lex Fridman
I believe that people are fundamentally good, and so if AI, especially open source AI can make them smarter, it just empowers the goodness in humans.
I believe that people are fundamentally good, and so if AI, especially open source AI can make them smarter, it just empowers the goodness in humans.
Yann LeCun
So I share that feeling. Okay. I think people are fundamentally good and in fact, a lot of doomers are doomers because they don’t think that people are fundamentally good.
So I share that feeling. Okay. I think people are fundamentally good and in fact, a lot of doomers are doomers because they don’t think that people are fundamentally good.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Yann LeCun, his third time on this podcast. He is the chief AI scientist at Meta, professor at NYU, Turing Award winner and one of the seminal figures in the history of artificial intelligence. He and Meta AI have been big proponents of open sourcing, AI development and have been walking the walk by open sourcing many of their biggest models, including Llama 2 and eventually Llama 3. Also, Yann has been an outspoken critic of those people in the AI community who warn about the looming danger and existential threat of AGI. He believes the AGI will be created one day, but it will be good. It will not escape human control, nor will it dominate and kill all humans.
The following is a conversation with Yann LeCun, his third time on this podcast. He is the chief AI scientist at Meta, professor at NYU, Turing Award winner and one of the seminal figures in the history of artificial intelligence. He and Meta AI have been big proponents of open sourcing, AI development and have been walking the walk by open sourcing many of their biggest models, including Llama 2 and eventually Llama 3. Also, Yann has been an outspoken critic of those people in the AI community who warn about the looming danger and existential threat of AGI. He believes the AGI will be created one day, but it will be good. It will not escape human control, nor will it dominate and kill all humans.
Limits of LLMs
At this moment of rapid AI development, this happens to be somewhat a controversial position, and so it’s been fun seeing Yann get into a lot of intense and fascinating discussions online as we do in this very conversation. This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Yann LeCun. You’ve had some strong statements, technical statements about the future of artificial intelligence throughout your career actually, but recently as well, you’ve said that autoregressive LLMs are not the way we’re going to make progress towards superhuman intelligence. These are the large language models like GPT-4, like Llama 2 and 3 soon and so on. How do they work and why are they not going to take us all the way?
Yann LeCun
For a number of reasons. The first is that there is a number of characteristics of intelligent behavior. For example, the capacity to understand the world, understand the physical world, the ability to remember and retrieve things, persistent memory, the ability to reason, and the ability to plan. Those are four essential characteristics of intelligent systems or entities, humans, animals. LLMs can do none of those or they can only do them in a very primitive way and they don’t really understand the physical world. They don’t really have persistent memory. They can’t really reason and they certainly can’t plan. And so if you expect the system to become intelligent just without having the possibility of doing those things, you’re making a mistake. That is not to say that autoregressive LLMs are not useful. They’re certainly useful, that they’re not interesting, that we can’t build a whole ecosystem of applications around them. Of course we can, but as a pass towards human-level intelligence, they’re missing essential components.
For a number of reasons. The first is that there is a number of characteristics of intelligent behavior. For example, the capacity to understand the world, understand the physical world, the ability to remember and retrieve things, persistent memory, the ability to reason, and the ability to plan. Those are four essential characteristics of intelligent systems or entities, humans, animals. LLMs can do none of those or they can only do them in a very primitive way and they don’t really understand the physical world. They don’t really have persistent memory. They can’t really reason and they certainly can’t plan. And so if you expect the system to become intelligent just without having the possibility of doing those things, you’re making a mistake. That is not to say that autoregressive LLMs are not useful. They’re certainly useful, that they’re not interesting, that we can’t build a whole ecosystem of applications around them. Of course we can, but as a pass towards human-level intelligence, they’re missing essential components.
And then there is another tidbit or fact that I think is very interesting. Those LLMs are trained on enormous amounts of texts, basically, the entirety of all publicly available texts on the internet, right? That’s typically on the order of 10 to the 13 tokens. Each token is typically two bytes, so that’s two 10 to the 13 bytes as training data. It would take you or me 170,000 years to just read through this at eight hours a day. So it seems like an enormous amount of knowledge that those systems can accumulate, but then you realize it’s really not that much data. If you talk to developmental psychologists and they tell you a four-year-old has been awake for 16,000 hours in his or her life, and the amount of information that has reached the visual cortex of that child in four years is about 10 to 15 bytes.
And you can compute this by estimating that the optical nerve carry about 20 megabytes per second roughly, and so 10 to the 15 bytes for a four-year-old versus two times 10 to the 13 bytes for 170,000 years worth of reading. What that tells you is that through sensory input, we see a lot more information than we do through language, and that despite our intuition, most of what we learn and most of our knowledge is through our observation and interaction with the real world, not through language. Everything that we learn in the first few years of life, and certainly everything that animals learn has nothing to do with language.
Lex Fridman
So it would be good to maybe push against some of the intuition behind what you’re saying. So it is true there’s several orders of magnitude more data coming into the human mind much faster, and the human mind is able to learn very quickly from that, filter the data very quickly. Somebody might argue your comparison between sensory data versus language, that language is already very compressed. It already contains a lot more information than the bytes it takes to store them if you compare it to visual data. So there’s a lot of wisdom and language. There’s words, and the way we stitch them together, it already contains a lot of information. So is it possible that language alone already has enough wisdom and knowledge in there to be able to, from that language, construct a world model and understanding of the world, an understanding of the physical world that you’re saying LLMs lack?
So it would be good to maybe push against some of the intuition behind what you’re saying. So it is true there’s several orders of magnitude more data coming into the human mind much faster, and the human mind is able to learn very quickly from that, filter the data very quickly. Somebody might argue your comparison between sensory data versus language, that language is already very compressed. It already contains a lot more information than the bytes it takes to store them if you compare it to visual data. So there’s a lot of wisdom and language. There’s words, and the way we stitch them together, it already contains a lot of information. So is it possible that language alone already has enough wisdom and knowledge in there to be able to, from that language, construct a world model and understanding of the world, an understanding of the physical world that you’re saying LLMs lack?
Yann LeCun
So it’s a big debate among philosophers and also cognitive scientists, like whether intelligence needs to be grounded in reality. I’m clearly in the camp that yes, intelligence cannot appear without some grounding in some reality. It doesn’t need to be physical reality. It could be simulated, but the environment is just much richer than what you can express in language. Language is a very approximate representation or percepts and/or mental models. I mean, there’s a lot of tasks that we accomplish where we manipulate a mental model of the situation at hand, and that has nothing to do with language. Everything that’s physical, mechanical, whatever, when we build something, when we accomplish a task, model task of grabbing something, et cetera, we plan or action sequences, and we do this by essentially imagining the result of the outcome of a sequence of actions that we might imagine and that requires mental models that don’t have much to do with language, and I would argue most of our knowledge is derived from that interaction with the physical world.
So it’s a big debate among philosophers and also cognitive scientists, like whether intelligence needs to be grounded in reality. I’m clearly in the camp that yes, intelligence cannot appear without some grounding in some reality. It doesn’t need to be physical reality. It could be simulated, but the environment is just much richer than what you can express in language. Language is a very approximate representation or percepts and/or mental models. I mean, there’s a lot of tasks that we accomplish where we manipulate a mental model of the situation at hand, and that has nothing to do with language. Everything that’s physical, mechanical, whatever, when we build something, when we accomplish a task, model task of grabbing something, et cetera, we plan or action sequences, and we do this by essentially imagining the result of the outcome of a sequence of actions that we might imagine and that requires mental models that don’t have much to do with language, and I would argue most of our knowledge is derived from that interaction with the physical world.
So a lot of my colleagues who are more interested in things like computer vision are really on that camp that AI needs to be embodied essentially. And then other people coming from the NLP side or maybe some other motivation don’t necessarily agree with that, and philosophers are split as well, and the complexity of the world is hard to imagine. It’s hard to represent all the complexities that we take completely for granted in the real world that we don’t even imagine require intelligence, right?
This is the old Moravec paradox, from the pioneer of robotics, hence Moravec, who said, how is it that with computers, it seems to be easy to do high-level complex tasks like playing chess and solving integrals and doing things like that, whereas the thing we take for granted that we do every day, like, I don’t know, learning to drive a car or grabbing an object, we can’t do with computers, and we have LLMs that can pass the bar exam, so they must be smart, but then they can’t learn to drive in 20 hours like any 17-year old, they can’t learn to clear out the dinner table and fill up the dishwasher like any 10-year old can learn in one shot. Why is that? What are we missing? What type of learning or reasoning architecture or whatever are we missing that basically prevent us from having level five sort of in cars and domestic robots?
Lex Fridman
Can a large language model construct a world model that does know how to drive and does know how to fill a dishwasher, but just doesn’t know how to deal with visual data at this time, so it can operate in a space of concepts?
Can a large language model construct a world model that does know how to drive and does know how to fill a dishwasher, but just doesn’t know how to deal with visual data at this time, so it can operate in a space of concepts?
Yann LeCun
So yeah, that’s what a lot of people are working on. So the short answer is no, and the more complex answer is you can use all kinds of tricks to get an LLM to basically digest visual representations of images or video or audio for that matter. And a classical way of doing this is you train a vision system in some way, and we have a number of ways to train vision systems either supervised, semi-supervised, self-supervised, all kinds of different ways, that will turn any image into a high-level representation. Basically a list of tokens that are really similar to the kind of tokens that typical LLM takes as an input.
So yeah, that’s what a lot of people are working on. So the short answer is no, and the more complex answer is you can use all kinds of tricks to get an LLM to basically digest visual representations of images or video or audio for that matter. And a classical way of doing this is you train a vision system in some way, and we have a number of ways to train vision systems either supervised, semi-supervised, self-supervised, all kinds of different ways, that will turn any image into a high-level representation. Basically a list of tokens that are really similar to the kind of tokens that typical LLM takes as an input.
And then you just feed that to the LLM in addition to the text, and you just expect the LLM, during training, to be able to use those representations to help make decisions. I mean, there’s been work along those lines for quite a long time and now, you see those systems. I mean there are LLMs that have some vision extension, but they’re basically hacks in the sense that those things are not trained to really understand the world. They’re not trained with video, for example. They don’t really understand intuitive physics, at least not at the moment.
Lex Fridman
So you don’t think there’s something special to you about intuitive physics, about sort of common sense reasoning about the physical space, about physical reality. That to you is a giant leap that LLMs are just not able to do?
So you don’t think there’s something special to you about intuitive physics, about sort of common sense reasoning about the physical space, about physical reality. That to you is a giant leap that LLMs are just not able to do?
Yann LeCun
We’re not going to be able to do this with the type of LLMs that we are working with today, and there’s a number of reasons for this, but the main reason is the way LLMs are trained is that you take a piece of text, you remove some of the words in that text, you mask them, you replace them by blank markers, and you train a genetic neural net to predict the words that are missing. And if you build this neural net in a particular way so that it can only look at words that are to the left or the one it’s trying to predict, then what you have is a system that basically is trying to predict the next word in a text. So then you can feed it a text, a prompt, and you can ask it to predict the next word. It can never predict the next word exactly.
We’re not going to be able to do this with the type of LLMs that we are working with today, and there’s a number of reasons for this, but the main reason is the way LLMs are trained is that you take a piece of text, you remove some of the words in that text, you mask them, you replace them by blank markers, and you train a genetic neural net to predict the words that are missing. And if you build this neural net in a particular way so that it can only look at words that are to the left or the one it’s trying to predict, then what you have is a system that basically is trying to predict the next word in a text. So then you can feed it a text, a prompt, and you can ask it to predict the next word. It can never predict the next word exactly.
So what it’s going to do is produce a probability distribution of all the possible words in a dictionary. In fact, it doesn’t predict words. It predicts tokens that are kind of subword units, and so it’s easy to handle the uncertainty in the prediction there because there is only a finite number of possible words in the dictionary, and you can just compute a distribution over them. Then what the system does is that it picks a word from that distribution. Of course, there’s a higher chance of picking words that have a higher probability within that distribution. So you sample from that distribution to actually produce a word, and then you shift that word into the input, and so that allows the system not to predict the second word, and once you do this, you shift it into the input, et cetera.
Bilingualism and thinking
That’s called autoregressive prediction, which is why those LLMs should be called autoregressive LLMs, but we just call them LLMs, and there is a difference between this kind of process and a process by which before producing a word… When you and I talk, you and I are bilingual, we think about what we’re going to say, and it’s relatively independent of the language in which we’re going to say. When we talk about, I don’t know, let’s say a mathematical concept or something, the kind of thinking that we’re doing and the answer that we’re planning to produce is not linked to whether we’re going to see it in French or Russian or English.
Lex Fridman
Chomsky just rolled his eyes, but I understand, so you’re saying that there’s a bigger abstraction that goes before language and maps onto language?
Chomsky just rolled his eyes, but I understand, so you’re saying that there’s a bigger abstraction that goes before language and maps onto language?
Yann LeCun
Right. It’s certainly true for a lot of thinking that we do.
Right. It’s certainly true for a lot of thinking that we do.
Lex Fridman
Is that obvious that we don’t… You’re saying your thinking is same in French as it is in English?
Is that obvious that we don’t… You’re saying your thinking is same in French as it is in English?
Yann LeCun
Yeah, pretty much.
Yeah, pretty much.
Lex Fridman
Pretty much or how flexible are you if there’s a probability distribution?
Pretty much or how flexible are you if there’s a probability distribution?
Yann LeCun
Well, it depends what kind of thinking, right? If it’s producing puns, I get much better in French than English about that, or much worse.
Well, it depends what kind of thinking, right? If it’s producing puns, I get much better in French than English about that, or much worse.
Lex Fridman
Is there an abstract representation of puns? Is your humor an abstract… When you tweet and your tweets are sometimes a little bit spicy, is there an abstract representation in your brain of a tweet before it maps onto English?
Is there an abstract representation of puns? Is your humor an abstract… When you tweet and your tweets are sometimes a little bit spicy, is there an abstract representation in your brain of a tweet before it maps onto English?
Yann LeCun
There is an abstract representation of imagining the reaction of a reader to that text.
There is an abstract representation of imagining the reaction of a reader to that text.
Lex Fridman
Or you start with laughter and then figure out how to make that happen?
Or you start with laughter and then figure out how to make that happen?
Yann LeCun
Or figure out like a reaction you want to cause and then figure out how to say it so that it causes that reaction. But that’s really close to language. But think about a mathematical concept or imagining something you want to build out of wood or something like this. The kind of thinking you’re doing has absolutely nothing to do with language really. It’s not like you have necessarily an internal monologue in any particular language. You are imagining mental models of the thing. I mean, if I ask you to imagine what this water bottle will look like if I rotate it 90 degrees, that has nothing to do with language. And so clearly, there is a more abstract level of representation in which we do most of our thinking, and we plan what we’re going to say if the output is uttered words as opposed to an output being muscle actions, we plan our answer before we produce it.
Or figure out like a reaction you want to cause and then figure out how to say it so that it causes that reaction. But that’s really close to language. But think about a mathematical concept or imagining something you want to build out of wood or something like this. The kind of thinking you’re doing has absolutely nothing to do with language really. It’s not like you have necessarily an internal monologue in any particular language. You are imagining mental models of the thing. I mean, if I ask you to imagine what this water bottle will look like if I rotate it 90 degrees, that has nothing to do with language. And so clearly, there is a more abstract level of representation in which we do most of our thinking, and we plan what we’re going to say if the output is uttered words as opposed to an output being muscle actions, we plan our answer before we produce it.
LLMs don’t do that. They just produce one word after the other instinctively if you want. It’s a bit like the subconscious actions where you’re distracted, you’re doing something, you’re completely concentrated, and someone comes to you and asks you a question and you kind of answer the question. You don’t have time to think about the answer, but the answer is easy. So you don’t need to pay attention. You sort of respond automatically. That’s kind of what an LLM does. It doesn’t think about its answer really. It retrieves it because it’s accumulated a lot of knowledge. So it can retrieve some things, but it’s going to just spit out one token after the other without planning the answer.
Lex Fridman
But you’re making it sound just one token after the other. One token at a time generation is bound to be simplistic, but if the world model is sufficiently sophisticated that one token at a time, the most likely thing it generates is a sequence of tokens is going to be a deeply profound thing.
But you’re making it sound just one token after the other. One token at a time generation is bound to be simplistic, but if the world model is sufficiently sophisticated that one token at a time, the most likely thing it generates is a sequence of tokens is going to be a deeply profound thing.
Yann LeCun
But then that assumes that those systems actually possess an eternal world model.
But then that assumes that those systems actually possess an eternal world model.
Video prediction
Lex Fridman
So really goes to the… I think the fundamental question is can you build a really complete world model, not complete, but one that has a deep understanding of the world?
So really goes to the… I think the fundamental question is can you build a really complete world model, not complete, but one that has a deep understanding of the world?
Yann LeCun
Yeah. So can you build this first of all by prediction, and the answer is probably yes. Can you build it by predicting words? And the answer is most probably no, because language is very poor in terms of weak or low bandwidth if you want, there’s just not enough information there. So building world models means observing the world and understanding why the world is evolving the way it is, and then the extra component of a world model is something that can predict how the world is going to evolve as a consequence of an action you might take.
Yeah. So can you build this first of all by prediction, and the answer is probably yes. Can you build it by predicting words? And the answer is most probably no, because language is very poor in terms of weak or low bandwidth if you want, there’s just not enough information there. So building world models means observing the world and understanding why the world is evolving the way it is, and then the extra component of a world model is something that can predict how the world is going to evolve as a consequence of an action you might take.
So one model really is here is my idea of the state of the world at time, T, here is an action I might take. What is the predicted state of the world at time, T+1? Now that state of the world does not need to represent everything about the world, it just needs to represent enough that’s relevant for this planning of the action, but not necessarily all the details. Now, here is the problem. You’re not going to be able to do this with generative models. So a generative model has trained on video, and we’ve tried to do this for 10 years, you take a video, show a system, a piece of video, and then ask you to predict the reminder of the video, basically predict what’s going to happen.
Lex Fridman
One frame at a time, do the same thing as the autoregressive LLMs do, but for video.
One frame at a time, do the same thing as the autoregressive LLMs do, but for video.
Yann LeCun
Right. Either one frame at a time-
Right. Either one frame at a time-
Lex Fridman
LVMs.
LVMs.
Yann LeCun
… or a group of frames at a time. But yeah, a large video model if you want. The idea of doing this has been floating around for a long time and at FAIR, some of our colleagues and I have been trying to do this for about 10 years, and you can’t really do the same trick as with LLMs because LLMs, as I said, you can’t predict exactly which word is going to follow a sequence of words, but you can predict the distribution of words. Now, if you go to video, what you would have to do is predict the distribution of all possible frames in a video, and we don’t really know how to do that properly.
… or a group of frames at a time. But yeah, a large video model if you want. The idea of doing this has been floating around for a long time and at FAIR, some of our colleagues and I have been trying to do this for about 10 years, and you can’t really do the same trick as with LLMs because LLMs, as I said, you can’t predict exactly which word is going to follow a sequence of words, but you can predict the distribution of words. Now, if you go to video, what you would have to do is predict the distribution of all possible frames in a video, and we don’t really know how to do that properly.
We do not know how to represent distributions over high-dimensional, continuous spaces in ways that are useful. And there lies the main issue, and the reason we can do this is because the world is incredibly more complicated and richer in terms of information than text. Text is discrete, video is high-dimensional and continuous. A lot of details in this. So if I take a video of this room and the video is a camera panning around, there is no way I can predict everything that’s going to be in the room as I pan around. The system cannot predict what’s going to be in the room as the camera is panning. Maybe it’s going to predict this is a room where there’s a light and there is a wall and things like that. It can’t predict what the painting of the wall looks like or what the texture of the couch looks like. Certainly not the texture of the carpet. So there’s no way I can predict all those details.
So one way to possibly handle this, which we’ve been working for a long time, is to have a model that has what’s called a latent variable. And the latent variable is fed to a neural net, and it’s supposed to represent all the information about the world that you don’t perceive yet, and that you need to augment the system for the prediction to do a good job at predicting pixels, including the fine texture of the carpet and the couch and the painting on the wall.
That has been a complete failure essentially. And we’ve tried lots of things. We tried just straight neural nets, we tried GANs, we tried VAEs, all kinds of regularized auto encoders. We tried many things. We also tried those kinds of methods to learn good representations of images or video that could then be used as input to, for example, an image classification system. That also has basically failed. All the systems that attempt to predict missing parts of an image or video from a corrupted version of it, basically, so take an image or a video, corrupt it or transform it in some way, and then try to reconstruct the complete video or image from the corrupted version, and then hope that internally, the system will develop good representations of images that you can use for object recognition, segmentation, whatever it is. That has been essentially a complete failure and it works really well for text. That’s the principle that is used for LLMs, right?
Lex Fridman
So where’s the failure exactly? Is it that it’s very difficult to form a good representation of an image, like a good embedding of all the important information in the image? Is it in terms of the consistency of image to image, to image to image that forms the video? If we do a highlight reel of all the ways you failed, what’s that look like?
So where’s the failure exactly? Is it that it’s very difficult to form a good representation of an image, like a good embedding of all the important information in the image? Is it in terms of the consistency of image to image, to image to image that forms the video? If we do a highlight reel of all the ways you failed, what’s that look like?
Yann LeCun
Okay, so the reason this doesn’t work is first of all, I have to tell you exactly what doesn’t work because there is something else that does work. So the thing that does not work is training the system to learn representations of images by training it to reconstruct a good image from a corrupted version of it, okay? That’s what doesn’t work. And we have a whole slew of techniques for this that are variant of denoising autoencoders, something called MAE developed by some of my colleagues at FAIR, masked autoencoder. So it’s basically like the LLMs or things like this where you train the system by corrupting texts except you corrupt images, you remove patches from it, and you train a gigantic neural network reconstruct. The features you get are not good, and you know they’re not good because if you now train the same architecture, but you train it to supervise with label data, with textual descriptions of images, et cetera, you do get good representations and the performance on recognition tasks is much better than if you do this self-supervised retraining.
Okay, so the reason this doesn’t work is first of all, I have to tell you exactly what doesn’t work because there is something else that does work. So the thing that does not work is training the system to learn representations of images by training it to reconstruct a good image from a corrupted version of it, okay? That’s what doesn’t work. And we have a whole slew of techniques for this that are variant of denoising autoencoders, something called MAE developed by some of my colleagues at FAIR, masked autoencoder. So it’s basically like the LLMs or things like this where you train the system by corrupting texts except you corrupt images, you remove patches from it, and you train a gigantic neural network reconstruct. The features you get are not good, and you know they’re not good because if you now train the same architecture, but you train it to supervise with label data, with textual descriptions of images, et cetera, you do get good representations and the performance on recognition tasks is much better than if you do this self-supervised retraining.
Lex Fridman
The architecture is good?
The architecture is good?
Yann LeCun
The architecture is good, the architecture of the encoder is good, but the fact that you train the system to reconstruct images does not lead it to produce to long, good generic features of images.
The architecture is good, the architecture of the encoder is good, but the fact that you train the system to reconstruct images does not lead it to produce to long, good generic features of images.
Lex Fridman
When you train in a self-supervised way?
When you train in a self-supervised way?
Yann LeCun
Self-supervised by reconstruction.
Self-supervised by reconstruction.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, by reconstruction.
Yeah, by reconstruction.
Yann LeCun
Okay, so what’s the alternative? The alternative is joint embedding.
Okay, so what’s the alternative? The alternative is joint embedding.
JEPA (Joint-Embedding Predictive Architecture)
Lex Fridman
What is joint embedding? What are these architectures that you’re so excited about?
What is joint embedding? What are these architectures that you’re so excited about?
Yann LeCun
Okay, so now instead of training a system to encode the image and then training it to reconstruct the full image from a corrupted version, you take the full image, you take the corrupted or transformed version, you run them both through encoders, which in general, are identical, but not necessarily. And then you train a predictor on top of those encoders to predict the representation of the full input from the representation of the corrupted one. So joint embedding, because you’re taking the full input and the corrupted version or transformed version, run them both through encoders, you get a joint embedding, and then you’re saying, can I predict the representation of the full one from the representation of the corrupted one?
Okay, so now instead of training a system to encode the image and then training it to reconstruct the full image from a corrupted version, you take the full image, you take the corrupted or transformed version, you run them both through encoders, which in general, are identical, but not necessarily. And then you train a predictor on top of those encoders to predict the representation of the full input from the representation of the corrupted one. So joint embedding, because you’re taking the full input and the corrupted version or transformed version, run them both through encoders, you get a joint embedding, and then you’re saying, can I predict the representation of the full one from the representation of the corrupted one?
And I call this a JEPA, so that means joint embedding predictive architecture because this joint embedding and there is this predictor that predicts the representation of the good guy from the bad guy. And the big question is how do you train something like this? And until five years ago or six years ago, we didn’t have particularly good answers for how you train those things except for one, called contrastive learning, where the idea of contrastive learning is you take a pair of images that are, again, an image and a corrupted version or degraded version somehow or transformed version of the original one, and you train the predicted representation to be the same as that. If you only do this, this system collapses. It basically completely ignores the input and produces representations that are constant. So the contrastive methods avoid this, and those things have been around since the early ’90s, I had a paper on this in 1993, is you also show pairs of images that you know are different, and then you push away the representations from each other. So you say, not only do representations of things that we know are the same should be the same or should be similar, but representation of things that we know are different should be different. And that prevents the collapse, but it has some limitation. And there’s a whole bunch of techniques that have appeared over the last six, seven years that can revive this type of method, some of them from FAIR, some of them from Google and other places, but there are limitations to those contrastive methods.
What has changed in the last three, four years is now we have methods that are non-contrastive. So they don’t require those negative contrastive samples of images that we know are different. You turn them on you with images that are different versions or different views of the same thing, and you rely on some other tricks to prevent the system from collapsing. And we have half a dozen different methods for this now.
JEPA vs LLMs
Lex Fridman
So what is the fundamental difference between joint embedding architectures and LLMs? Can JEPA take us to AGI? Whether we should say that you don’t like the term AGI, and we’ll probably argue I think every single time I’ve talked to you, we’ve argued about the G in AGI.
So what is the fundamental difference between joint embedding architectures and LLMs? Can JEPA take us to AGI? Whether we should say that you don’t like the term AGI, and we’ll probably argue I think every single time I’ve talked to you, we’ve argued about the G in AGI.
Yann LeCun
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
I get it. I get it. Well, we’ll probably continue to argue about it. It’s great. You like AMI because you like French and ami is friend in French, and AMI stands for advanced machine intelligence. But either way, can JEPA take us to that towards that advanced machine intelligence?
I get it. I get it. Well, we’ll probably continue to argue about it. It’s great. You like AMI because you like French and ami is friend in French, and AMI stands for advanced machine intelligence. But either way, can JEPA take us to that towards that advanced machine intelligence?
Yann LeCun
Well, so it’s a first step. Okay, so first of all, what’s the difference with generative architectures like LLMs? So LLMs or vision systems that are trained by reconstruction generate the inputs. They generate the original input that is non-corrupted, non-transformed, so you have to predict all the pixels, and there is a huge amount of resources spent in the system to actually predict all those pixels, all the details. In a JEPA, you’re not trying to predict all the pixels, you’re only trying to predict an abstract representation of the inputs. And that’s much easier in many ways. So what the JEPA system, when it’s being trained, is trying to do is extract as much information as possible from the input, but yet only extract information that is relatively easily predictable. So there’s a lot of things in the world that we cannot predict. For example, if you have a self-driving car driving down the street or road, there may be trees around the road and it could be a windy day. So the leaves on the tree are kind moving in kind semi-chaotic, random ways that you can’t predict and you don’t care, you don’t want to predict. So what you want is your encoder to basically eliminate all those details. It’ll tell you there’s moving leaves, but it’s not going to give the details of exactly what’s going on. And so when you do the prediction in representation space, you’re not going to have to predict every single pixel of every leaf. And that not only is a lot simpler, but also, it allows the system to essentially learn an abstract representation of the world where what can be modeled and predicted is preserved and the rest is viewed as noise and eliminated by the encoder.
Well, so it’s a first step. Okay, so first of all, what’s the difference with generative architectures like LLMs? So LLMs or vision systems that are trained by reconstruction generate the inputs. They generate the original input that is non-corrupted, non-transformed, so you have to predict all the pixels, and there is a huge amount of resources spent in the system to actually predict all those pixels, all the details. In a JEPA, you’re not trying to predict all the pixels, you’re only trying to predict an abstract representation of the inputs. And that’s much easier in many ways. So what the JEPA system, when it’s being trained, is trying to do is extract as much information as possible from the input, but yet only extract information that is relatively easily predictable. So there’s a lot of things in the world that we cannot predict. For example, if you have a self-driving car driving down the street or road, there may be trees around the road and it could be a windy day. So the leaves on the tree are kind moving in kind semi-chaotic, random ways that you can’t predict and you don’t care, you don’t want to predict. So what you want is your encoder to basically eliminate all those details. It’ll tell you there’s moving leaves, but it’s not going to give the details of exactly what’s going on. And so when you do the prediction in representation space, you’re not going to have to predict every single pixel of every leaf. And that not only is a lot simpler, but also, it allows the system to essentially learn an abstract representation of the world where what can be modeled and predicted is preserved and the rest is viewed as noise and eliminated by the encoder.
So it lifts the level of abstraction of the representation. If you think about this, this is something we do absolutely all the time. Whenever we describe a phenomenon, we describe it at a particular level of abstraction. We don’t always describe every natural phenomenon in terms of quantum field theory. That would be impossible. So we have multiple levels of abstraction to describe what happens in the world, starting from quantum field theory, to atomic theory and molecules and chemistry, materials and all the way up to concrete objects in the real world and things like that. So we can’t just only model everything at the lowest level. And that’s what the idea of JEPA is really about, learn abstract representation in a self-supervised manner, and you can do it hierarchically as well. So that, I think, is an essential component of an intelligent system. And in language, we can get away without doing this because language is already to some level abstract and already has eliminated a lot of information that is not predictable. And so we can get away without doing the joint embedding, without lifting the abstraction level and by directly predicting words.
Lex Fridman
So joint embedding, it’s still generative, but it’s generative in this abstract representation space?
So joint embedding, it’s still generative, but it’s generative in this abstract representation space?
Yann LeCun
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
And you’re saying language, we were lazy with language because we already got the abstract representation for free, and now we have to zoom out, actually think about generally intelligent systems. We have to deal with a full mess of physical reality, of reality. And you do have to do this step of jumping from the full, rich, detailed reality to a abstract representation of that reality based on what you can then reason and all that kind of stuff.
And you’re saying language, we were lazy with language because we already got the abstract representation for free, and now we have to zoom out, actually think about generally intelligent systems. We have to deal with a full mess of physical reality, of reality. And you do have to do this step of jumping from the full, rich, detailed reality to a abstract representation of that reality based on what you can then reason and all that kind of stuff.
Yann LeCun
Right. And the thing is those self-supervised algorithm that learn by prediction, even in representation space, they learn more concept if the input data you feed them is more redundant. The more redundancy there is in the data, the more they’re able to capture some internal structure of it. And so there is way more redundancy in the structure in perceptual inputs, sensory input like vision than there is in text, which is not nearly as redundant. This is back to the question you were asking a few minutes ago. Language might represent more information really, because it’s already compressed. You’re right about that, but that means it’s also less redundant, and so self-supervision, you will not work as well.
Right. And the thing is those self-supervised algorithm that learn by prediction, even in representation space, they learn more concept if the input data you feed them is more redundant. The more redundancy there is in the data, the more they’re able to capture some internal structure of it. And so there is way more redundancy in the structure in perceptual inputs, sensory input like vision than there is in text, which is not nearly as redundant. This is back to the question you were asking a few minutes ago. Language might represent more information really, because it’s already compressed. You’re right about that, but that means it’s also less redundant, and so self-supervision, you will not work as well.
Lex Fridman
Is it possible to join the self-supervised training on visual data and self-supervised training on language data? There is a huge amount of knowledge, even though you talk down about those 10 to the 13 tokens. Those 10 to the 13 tokens represent the entirety-
Is it possible to join the self-supervised training on visual data and self-supervised training on language data? There is a huge amount of knowledge, even though you talk down about those 10 to the 13 tokens. Those 10 to the 13 tokens represent the entirety-
Lex Fridman
Those 10 to the 13 tokens represent the entirety, a large fraction of what us humans have figured out, both the shit-talk on Reddit and the contents of all the books and the articles and the full spectrum of human intellectual creation. So is it possible to join those two together?
Those 10 to the 13 tokens represent the entirety, a large fraction of what us humans have figured out, both the shit-talk on Reddit and the contents of all the books and the articles and the full spectrum of human intellectual creation. So is it possible to join those two together?
Yann LeCun
Well, eventually, yes. But I think if we do this too early, we run the risk of being tempted to cheat. And in fact, that’s what people are doing at the moment with vision-language model. We’re basically cheating. We’re using language as a crutch to help the deficiencies of our vision systems to learn good representations from images and video.
Well, eventually, yes. But I think if we do this too early, we run the risk of being tempted to cheat. And in fact, that’s what people are doing at the moment with vision-language model. We’re basically cheating. We’re using language as a crutch to help the deficiencies of our vision systems to learn good representations from images and video.
And the problem with this is that we might improve our language models by feeding them images, but we’re not going to get to the level of even the intelligence or level of understanding of the world of a cat or a dog, which doesn’t have language. They don’t have language and they understand the world much better than any LLM. They can plan really complex actions and imagine the result of a bunch of actions. How do we get machines to learn that before we combine that with language? Obviously if we combine this with language, this is going to be a winner, but before that, we have to focus on how do we get systems to learn how the world works?
Lex Fridman
So this joint-embedding predictive architecture, for you, that’s going to be able to learn something like common sense, something like what a cat uses to predict how to mess with its owner most optimally by knocking over a thing.
So this joint-embedding predictive architecture, for you, that’s going to be able to learn something like common sense, something like what a cat uses to predict how to mess with its owner most optimally by knocking over a thing.
Yann LeCun
That’s the hope. In fact, the techniques we’re using are non-contrastive. So not only is the architecture non-generative, the learning procedures we are using are non-contrastive. We have two sets of techniques. One set is based on distillation, and there’s a number of methods that use this principle, one by DeepMind called BYOL, a couple by FAIR, one called vcREG and another one called I-JEPA. And vcREG, I should say, is not a distillation method actually, but I-JEPA and BYOL certainly are. And there’s another one also called DINO or DINO also produced from at FAIR. And the idea of those things is that you take the full input, let’s say an image, you run it through an encoder, produces a representation, and then you corrupt that input or transform it, run it through essentially what amounts to the same encoder with some minor differences and then train a predictor.
That’s the hope. In fact, the techniques we’re using are non-contrastive. So not only is the architecture non-generative, the learning procedures we are using are non-contrastive. We have two sets of techniques. One set is based on distillation, and there’s a number of methods that use this principle, one by DeepMind called BYOL, a couple by FAIR, one called vcREG and another one called I-JEPA. And vcREG, I should say, is not a distillation method actually, but I-JEPA and BYOL certainly are. And there’s another one also called DINO or DINO also produced from at FAIR. And the idea of those things is that you take the full input, let’s say an image, you run it through an encoder, produces a representation, and then you corrupt that input or transform it, run it through essentially what amounts to the same encoder with some minor differences and then train a predictor.
Sometimes a predictor is very simple, sometimes it doesn’t exist, but train a predictor to predict a representation of the first uncorrupted input from the corrupted input. But you only train the second branch. You only train the part of the network that is fed with the corrupted input. The other network, you don’t train. But since they share the same weight, when you modify the first one, it also modifies the second one. And with various tricks, you can prevent the system from collapsing with the collapse of the type I was explaining before, where the system basically ignores the input. So that works very well. The two techniques we developed at FAIR, DINO and I-JEPA work really well for that.
DINO and I-JEPA
Lex Fridman
So what kind of data are we talking about here?
So what kind of data are we talking about here?
Yann LeCun
So there’s several scenario, one scenario is you take an image, you corrupt it by changing the cropping, for example, changing the size a little bit, maybe changing the orientation, blurring it, changing the colors, doing all kinds of horrible things to it.
So there’s several scenario, one scenario is you take an image, you corrupt it by changing the cropping, for example, changing the size a little bit, maybe changing the orientation, blurring it, changing the colors, doing all kinds of horrible things to it.
Lex Fridman
But basic horrible things?
But basic horrible things?
Yann LeCun
Basic horrible things that sort of degrade the quality a little bit and change the framing, crop the image. And in some cases, in the case of I-JEPA, you don’t need to do any of this, you just mask some parts of it. You just basically remove some regions, like a big block essentially, and then run through the encoders and train the entire system, encoder and predictor, to predict the representation of the good one from the representation of the corrupted one.
Basic horrible things that sort of degrade the quality a little bit and change the framing, crop the image. And in some cases, in the case of I-JEPA, you don’t need to do any of this, you just mask some parts of it. You just basically remove some regions, like a big block essentially, and then run through the encoders and train the entire system, encoder and predictor, to predict the representation of the good one from the representation of the corrupted one.
V-JEPA
So that’s the I-JEPA. It doesn’t need to know that it’s an image for example, because the only thing it needs to know is how to do this masking. Whereas with DINO, you need to know it’s an image because you need to do things like geometry transformation and blurring and things like that, that are really image specific. A more recent version of this that we have is called V-JEPA. So it’s basically the same idea as I-JEPA except it’s applied to video. So now you take a whole video and you mask a whole chunk of it. And what we mask is actually kind of a temporal tube, so a whole segment of each frame in the video over the entire video.
Lex Fridman
And that tube was statically positioned throughout the frames, just literally it’s a straight tube.
And that tube was statically positioned throughout the frames, just literally it’s a straight tube.
Yann LeCun
The tube, yeah, typically is 16 frames or something, and we mask the same region over the entire 16 frames. It’s a different one for every video obviously. And then again, train that system so as to predict the representation of the full video from the partially masked video. And that works really well. It’s the first system that we have that learns good representations of video so that when you feed those representations to a supervised classifier head, it can tell you what action is taking place in the video with pretty good accuracy. So that’s the first time we get something of that quality.
The tube, yeah, typically is 16 frames or something, and we mask the same region over the entire 16 frames. It’s a different one for every video obviously. And then again, train that system so as to predict the representation of the full video from the partially masked video. And that works really well. It’s the first system that we have that learns good representations of video so that when you feed those representations to a supervised classifier head, it can tell you what action is taking place in the video with pretty good accuracy. So that’s the first time we get something of that quality.
Lex Fridman
That’s a good test that a good representation is formed. That means there’s something to this.
That’s a good test that a good representation is formed. That means there’s something to this.
Yann LeCun
Yeah. We also preliminary result that seem to indicate that the representation allow our system to tell whether the video is physically possible or completely impossible, because some object disappeared or an object suddenly jumped from one location to another or changed shape or something.
Yeah. We also preliminary result that seem to indicate that the representation allow our system to tell whether the video is physically possible or completely impossible, because some object disappeared or an object suddenly jumped from one location to another or changed shape or something.
Lex Fridman
So it’s able to capture some physics based constraints about the reality represented in the video, about the appearance and the disappearance of objects.
So it’s able to capture some physics based constraints about the reality represented in the video, about the appearance and the disappearance of objects.
Yann LeCun
Yeah, that’s really new.
Yeah, that’s really new.
Lex Fridman
Okay, but can this actually get us to this kind of world model that understands enough about the world to be able to drive a car?
Okay, but can this actually get us to this kind of world model that understands enough about the world to be able to drive a car?
Yann LeCun
Possibly, this is going to take a while before we get to that point. And there are systems already robotic systems, that are based on this idea. And what you need for this is a slightly modified version of this, where imagine that you have a complete video and what you’re doing to this video is that you are either translating it in time towards the future. So you only see the beginning of the video, but you don’t see the latter part of it that is in the original one, or you just mask the second half of the video, for example. And then you train a JEPA system or the type I described, to predict the representation of the full video from the shifted one. But you also feed the predictor with an action. For example, the wheel is turned 10 degrees to the right or something, right?
Possibly, this is going to take a while before we get to that point. And there are systems already robotic systems, that are based on this idea. And what you need for this is a slightly modified version of this, where imagine that you have a complete video and what you’re doing to this video is that you are either translating it in time towards the future. So you only see the beginning of the video, but you don’t see the latter part of it that is in the original one, or you just mask the second half of the video, for example. And then you train a JEPA system or the type I described, to predict the representation of the full video from the shifted one. But you also feed the predictor with an action. For example, the wheel is turned 10 degrees to the right or something, right?
So if it’s a dash cam in a car and you know the angle of the wheel, you should be able to predict to some extent what’s going to happen to what you see. You’re not going to be able to predict all the details of objects that appear in the view obviously, but at a abstract representation level, you can probably predict what’s going to happen. So now what you have is a internal model that says, “Here is my idea of the state of the world at time T. Here is an action I’m taking. Here is a prediction of the state of the world at time T plus one, T plus delta T, T plus two seconds,” whatever it is. If you have a model of this type, you can use it for planning. So now you can do what LMS cannot do, which is planning what you’re going to do. So as you arrive at a particular outcome or satisfy a particular objective.
So you can have a number of objectives. I can predict that if I have an object like this and I open my hand, it’s going to fall. And if I push it with a particular force on the table, it’s going to move. If I push the table itself, it’s probably not going to move with the same force. So we have this internal model of the world in our mind, which allows us to plan sequences of actions to arrive at a particular goal. And so now if you have this world model, we can imagine a sequence of actions, predict what the outcome of the sequence of action is going to be, measure to what extent the final state satisfies a particular objective, like moving the bottle to the left of the table and then plan a sequence of actions that will minimize this objective, at runtime.
We’re not talking about learning, we’re talking about inference time, so this is planning, really. And in optimal control, this is a very classical thing. It’s called model predictive control. You have a model of the system you want to control that can predict the sequence of states corresponding to a sequence of commands. And you’re planning a sequence of commands so that according to your role model, the end state of the system will satisfy an objectives that you fix. This is the way rocket trajectories have been planned since computers have been around, so since the early ’60s essentially.
Hierarchical planning
Lex Fridman
So yes, for a model predictive control, but you also often talk about hierarchical planning. Can hierarchical planning emerge from this somehow?
So yes, for a model predictive control, but you also often talk about hierarchical planning. Can hierarchical planning emerge from this somehow?
Yann LeCun
Well, so no, you will have to build a specific architecture to allow for hierarchical planning. So hierarchical planning is absolutely necessary if you want to plan complex actions. If I want to go from, let’s say from New York to Paris, it’s the example I use all the time, and I’m sitting in my office at NYU, my objective that I need to minimize is my distance to Paris. At a high level, a very abstract representation of my location, I would have to decompose this into two sub goals. First one is go to the airport, second one is catch a plane to Paris. Okay, so my sub goal is now going to the airport. My objective function is my distance to the airport. How do I go to the airport where I have to go in the street and hail a taxi, which you can do in New York.
Well, so no, you will have to build a specific architecture to allow for hierarchical planning. So hierarchical planning is absolutely necessary if you want to plan complex actions. If I want to go from, let’s say from New York to Paris, it’s the example I use all the time, and I’m sitting in my office at NYU, my objective that I need to minimize is my distance to Paris. At a high level, a very abstract representation of my location, I would have to decompose this into two sub goals. First one is go to the airport, second one is catch a plane to Paris. Okay, so my sub goal is now going to the airport. My objective function is my distance to the airport. How do I go to the airport where I have to go in the street and hail a taxi, which you can do in New York.
Okay, now I have another sub goal go down on the street. Well that means going to the elevator, going down the elevator, walk out the street. How do I go to the elevator? I have to stand up from my chair, open the door in my office, go to the elevator, push the button. How do I get up for my chair? You can imagine going down, all the way down, to basically what amounts to millisecond by millisecond muscle control. And obviously you’re not going plan your entire trip from New York to Paris in terms of millisecond by millisecond muscle control. First, that would be incredibly expensive, but it will also be completely impossible because you don’t know all the conditions of what’s going to happen, how long it’s going to take to catch a taxi or to go to the airport with traffic. I mean, you would have to know exactly the condition of everything to be able to do this planning and you don’t have the information. So you have to do this hierarchical planning so that you can start acting and then sort of replanning as you go. And nobody really knows how to do this in AI. Nobody knows how to train a system to learn the appropriate multiple levels of representation so that hierarchical planning works.
Lex Fridman
Does something like that already emerge? So can you use an LLM, state-of-the-art LLM, to get you from New York to Paris by doing exactly the kind of detailed set of questions that you just did, which is, can you give me a list of 10 steps I need to do, to get from New York to Paris? And then for each of those steps, can you give me a list of 10 steps, how I make that step happen? And for each of those steps, can you give me a list of 10 steps to make each one of those, until you’re moving your individual muscles, maybe not, whatever you can actually act upon using your own mind.
Does something like that already emerge? So can you use an LLM, state-of-the-art LLM, to get you from New York to Paris by doing exactly the kind of detailed set of questions that you just did, which is, can you give me a list of 10 steps I need to do, to get from New York to Paris? And then for each of those steps, can you give me a list of 10 steps, how I make that step happen? And for each of those steps, can you give me a list of 10 steps to make each one of those, until you’re moving your individual muscles, maybe not, whatever you can actually act upon using your own mind.
Yann LeCun
Right. So there’s a lot of questions that are also implied by this, right? So the first thing is LLMs will be able to answer some of those questions down to some level of abstraction, under the condition that they’ve been trained with similar scenarios in their training set.
Right. So there’s a lot of questions that are also implied by this, right? So the first thing is LLMs will be able to answer some of those questions down to some level of abstraction, under the condition that they’ve been trained with similar scenarios in their training set.
Lex Fridman
They would be able to answer all of those questions, but some of them may be hallucinated meaning non-factual.
They would be able to answer all of those questions, but some of them may be hallucinated meaning non-factual.
Yann LeCun
Yeah, true. I mean they’ll probably produce some answer except they’re not going to be able to really produce millisecond by millisecond muscle control of how you stand up from your chair. But down to some level of abstraction where you can describe things by words, they might be able to give you a plan, but only under the condition that they’ve been trained to produce those kinds of plans. They’re not going to be able to plan for situations where that they never encountered before. They basically are going to have to regurgitate the template that they’ve been trained on.
Yeah, true. I mean they’ll probably produce some answer except they’re not going to be able to really produce millisecond by millisecond muscle control of how you stand up from your chair. But down to some level of abstraction where you can describe things by words, they might be able to give you a plan, but only under the condition that they’ve been trained to produce those kinds of plans. They’re not going to be able to plan for situations where that they never encountered before. They basically are going to have to regurgitate the template that they’ve been trained on.
Lex Fridman
Just for the example of New York to Paris, is it going to start getting into trouble? Which layer of abstraction do you think you’ll start? I can imagine almost every single part of that, an LLM would be able to answer somewhat accurately, especially when you’re talking about New York and Paris, major cities.
Just for the example of New York to Paris, is it going to start getting into trouble? Which layer of abstraction do you think you’ll start? I can imagine almost every single part of that, an LLM would be able to answer somewhat accurately, especially when you’re talking about New York and Paris, major cities.
Yann LeCun
I mean certainly LLM would be able to solve that problem if you fine tune it for it. And so I can’t say that an LLM cannot do this, it can do this if you train it for it, there’s no question down to a certain level where things can be formulated in terms of words. But if you want to go down to how you climb down the stairs or just stand up from your chair in terms of words, you can’t do it. That’s one of the reasons you need experience of the physical world, which is much higher bandwidth than what you can express in words, in human language.
I mean certainly LLM would be able to solve that problem if you fine tune it for it. And so I can’t say that an LLM cannot do this, it can do this if you train it for it, there’s no question down to a certain level where things can be formulated in terms of words. But if you want to go down to how you climb down the stairs or just stand up from your chair in terms of words, you can’t do it. That’s one of the reasons you need experience of the physical world, which is much higher bandwidth than what you can express in words, in human language.
Lex Fridman
So everything we’ve been talking about on the joint embedding space, is it possible that that’s what we need for the interaction with physical reality on the robotics front, and then just the LLMs are the thing that sits on top of it for the bigger reasoning, about the fact that I need to book a plane ticket and I need to know how to go to the websites and so on.
So everything we’ve been talking about on the joint embedding space, is it possible that that’s what we need for the interaction with physical reality on the robotics front, and then just the LLMs are the thing that sits on top of it for the bigger reasoning, about the fact that I need to book a plane ticket and I need to know how to go to the websites and so on.
Yann LeCun
Sure. And a lot of plans that people know about that are relatively high level are actually learned. Most people don’t invent the plans by themselves. We have some ability to do this of course, obviously, but most plans that people use are plans that have been trained on, they’ve seen other people use those plans or they’ve been told how to do things, right? That you can’t invent how you take a person who’s never heard of airplanes and tell them how do you go from New York to Paris? And they’re probably not going to be able to deconstruct the whole plan unless they’ve seen examples of that before. So certainly LLMs are going to be able to do this, but then how you link this from the low level of actions, that needs to be done with things like JEPA that basically lift the abstraction level of the representation without attempting to reconstruct the detail of the situation, that’s why we need JEPAs for.
Sure. And a lot of plans that people know about that are relatively high level are actually learned. Most people don’t invent the plans by themselves. We have some ability to do this of course, obviously, but most plans that people use are plans that have been trained on, they’ve seen other people use those plans or they’ve been told how to do things, right? That you can’t invent how you take a person who’s never heard of airplanes and tell them how do you go from New York to Paris? And they’re probably not going to be able to deconstruct the whole plan unless they’ve seen examples of that before. So certainly LLMs are going to be able to do this, but then how you link this from the low level of actions, that needs to be done with things like JEPA that basically lift the abstraction level of the representation without attempting to reconstruct the detail of the situation, that’s why we need JEPAs for.
Autoregressive LLMs
Lex Fridman
I would love to sort of linger on your skepticism around auto regressive LLMs. So one way I would like to test that skepticism is everything you say makes a lot of sense, but if I apply everything you said today and in general to I don’t know, 10 years ago, maybe a little bit less, no, let’s say three years ago, I wouldn’t be able to predict the success of LLMs. So does it make sense to you that autoregressive LLMs are able to be so damn good?
I would love to sort of linger on your skepticism around auto regressive LLMs. So one way I would like to test that skepticism is everything you say makes a lot of sense, but if I apply everything you said today and in general to I don’t know, 10 years ago, maybe a little bit less, no, let’s say three years ago, I wouldn’t be able to predict the success of LLMs. So does it make sense to you that autoregressive LLMs are able to be so damn good?
Yann LeCun
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Can you explain your intuition? Because if I were to take your wisdom and intuition at face value, I would say there’s no way autoregressive LLMs, one token at a time, would be able to do the kind of things they’re doing.
Can you explain your intuition? Because if I were to take your wisdom and intuition at face value, I would say there’s no way autoregressive LLMs, one token at a time, would be able to do the kind of things they’re doing.
Yann LeCun
No, there’s one thing that autoregressive LLMs or that LLMs in general, not just the autoregressive one, but including the bird style bidirectional ones, are exploiting and its self supervised running, and I’ve been a very, very strong advocate of self supervised running for many years. So those things are a incredibly impressive demonstration that self supervised running actually works. The idea that started, it didn’t start with BERT, but it was really kind of good demonstration with this.
No, there’s one thing that autoregressive LLMs or that LLMs in general, not just the autoregressive one, but including the bird style bidirectional ones, are exploiting and its self supervised running, and I’ve been a very, very strong advocate of self supervised running for many years. So those things are a incredibly impressive demonstration that self supervised running actually works. The idea that started, it didn’t start with BERT, but it was really kind of good demonstration with this.
So the idea that you take a piece of text, you corrupt it, and then you train some gigantic neural net to reconstruct the parts that are missing. That has produced an enormous amount of benefits. It allowed us to create systems that understand language, systems that can translate hundreds of languages in any direction, systems that are multilingual, so it’s a single system that can be trained to understand hundreds of languages and translate in any direction, and produce summaries and then answer questions and produce text.
And then there’s a special case of it, which is the auto regressive trick where you constrain the system to not elaborate a representation of the text from looking at the entire text, but only predicting a word from the words that are come before. And you do this by constraining the architecture of the network, and that’s what you can build an auto aggressive LLM from.
So there was a surprise many years ago with what’s called decoder only LLM. So since systems of this type that are just trying to produce words from the previous one and the fact that when you scale them up, they tend to really understand more about language. When you train them on lots of data, you make them really big. That was a surprise and that surprise occurred quite a while back, with work from Google, Meta, OpenAI, et cetera, going back to the GPT kind of work, general pre-trained transformers.
Lex Fridman
You mean like GPT2? There’s a certain place where you start to realize scaling might actually keep giving us an emergent benefit.
You mean like GPT2? There’s a certain place where you start to realize scaling might actually keep giving us an emergent benefit.
Yann LeCun
Yeah, I mean there were work from various places, but if you want to place it in the GPT timeline, that would be around GPT2, yeah.
Yeah, I mean there were work from various places, but if you want to place it in the GPT timeline, that would be around GPT2, yeah.
Lex Fridman
Well, because you said it so charismatic and you said so many words, but self supervised learning, yes. But again, the same intuition you’re applying to saying that auto aggressive LLMs cannot have a deep understanding of the world. If we just apply that, same intuition, does it make sense to you that they’re able to form enough of a representation in the world to be damn convincing, essentially passing the original touring test with flying colors?
Well, because you said it so charismatic and you said so many words, but self supervised learning, yes. But again, the same intuition you’re applying to saying that auto aggressive LLMs cannot have a deep understanding of the world. If we just apply that, same intuition, does it make sense to you that they’re able to form enough of a representation in the world to be damn convincing, essentially passing the original touring test with flying colors?
Yann LeCun
Well, we’re fooled by their fluency, right? We just assume that if a system is fluent in manipulating language, then it has all the characteristics of human intelligence, but that impression is false. We’re really fooled by it.
Well, we’re fooled by their fluency, right? We just assume that if a system is fluent in manipulating language, then it has all the characteristics of human intelligence, but that impression is false. We’re really fooled by it.
Lex Fridman
What do you think Alan Turing would say, without understanding anything, just hanging out with it?
What do you think Alan Turing would say, without understanding anything, just hanging out with it?
Yann LeCun
Alan Turing would decide that a Turing test is a really bad test, okay? This is what the AI community has decided many years ago that the Turing test was a really bad test of intelligence.
Alan Turing would decide that a Turing test is a really bad test, okay? This is what the AI community has decided many years ago that the Turing test was a really bad test of intelligence.
Lex Fridman
What would Hans Marvek say about the larger language models?
What would Hans Marvek say about the larger language models?
Yann LeCun
Hans Marvek would say that Marvek Paradox still applies. Okay, we can pass-
Hans Marvek would say that Marvek Paradox still applies. Okay, we can pass-
Lex Fridman
You don’t think he would be really impressed?
You don’t think he would be really impressed?
Yann LeCun
No, of course everybody would be impressed. But it’s not a question of being impressed or not, it’s the question of knowing what the limit of those systems can do. Again, they are impressive. They can do a lot of useful things. There’s a whole industry that is being built around them. They’re going to make progress, but there is a lot of things they cannot do, and we have to realize what they cannot do and then figure out how we get there. And I’m seeing this from basically 10 years of research on the idea of self supervised running, actually that’s going back more than 10 years, but the idea of self supervised running. So basically capturing the internal structure of a piece of a set of inputs without training the system for any particular task, to learning representations.
No, of course everybody would be impressed. But it’s not a question of being impressed or not, it’s the question of knowing what the limit of those systems can do. Again, they are impressive. They can do a lot of useful things. There’s a whole industry that is being built around them. They’re going to make progress, but there is a lot of things they cannot do, and we have to realize what they cannot do and then figure out how we get there. And I’m seeing this from basically 10 years of research on the idea of self supervised running, actually that’s going back more than 10 years, but the idea of self supervised running. So basically capturing the internal structure of a piece of a set of inputs without training the system for any particular task, to learning representations.
The conference I co-founded 14 years ago is called International Conference on Learning Representations. That’s the entire issue that deep learning is dealing with, and it’s been my obsession for almost 40 years now. So learning representation is really the thing. For the longest time, we could only do this with supervised learning, and then we started working on what we used to call unsupervised learning and revived the idea of unsupervised running in the early 2000s with your [inaudible 00:56:58] and Jeff Hinton. Then discovered that supervised running actually works pretty well if you can collect enough data. And so the whole idea of unsupervised, self supervised running kind of took a backseat for a bit, and then I tried to revive it in a big way starting in 2014, basically when we started FAIR and really pushing for finding new methods to do self supervised running both for text and for images and for video and audio.
And some of that work has been incredibly successful. I mean, the reason why we have multilingual translation system, things to do, content moderation on Meta, for example, on Facebook, that are multilingual, that understand whether a piece of text is hate speech not or something, is due to that progress using self supervised running for NLP, combining this with transformer architectures and blah, blah, blah.
But that’s the big success of self supervised running. We had similar success in speech recognition, a system called WAVE2VEC, which is also a joint embedding architecture, by the way, trained with contrastive running. And that system also can produce speech recognition systems that are multilingual with mostly unlabeled data and only need a few minutes of labeled data to actually do speech recognition, that’s amazing. We have systems now based on those combination of ideas that can do real time translation of hundreds of languages into each other, speech to speech.
Lex Fridman
Speech to speech, even including, which is fascinating, languages that don’t have written forms.
Speech to speech, even including, which is fascinating, languages that don’t have written forms.
Yann LeCun
That’s right.
That’s right.
Lex Fridman
Just spoken only.
Just spoken only.
Yann LeCun
That’s right. We don’t go through text, it goes directly from speech to speech using an internal representation of speech units that are discrete, but it’s called Textless NLP. We used to call it this way. But yeah, so I mean incredible success there. And then for 10 years, we tried to apply this idea to learning representations of images by training a system to predict videos, learning intuitive physics by training a system to predict what’s going to happen in the video.
That’s right. We don’t go through text, it goes directly from speech to speech using an internal representation of speech units that are discrete, but it’s called Textless NLP. We used to call it this way. But yeah, so I mean incredible success there. And then for 10 years, we tried to apply this idea to learning representations of images by training a system to predict videos, learning intuitive physics by training a system to predict what’s going to happen in the video.
And tried and tried and failed and failed, with generative models, with models that predict pixels. We could not get them to learn good representations of images. We could not get them to learn good representations of videos. And we tried many times, we published lots of papers on it, where they kind of sort of work, but not really great. They started working, we abandoned this idea of predicting every pixel and basically just doing the joint embedding and predicting and representation space, that works. So there’s ample evidence that we’re not going to be able to learn good representations of the real world using generative model. So I’m telling people, everybody’s talking about generative AI. If you’re really interested in human level AI, abandon the idea of generative AI.
Lex Fridman
Okay, but you really think it’s possible to get far with the joint embedding representation. So there’s common sense reasoning, and then there’s high level reasoning. I feel like those are two… The kind of reasoning that LLMs are able to do, okay, let me not use the word reasoning, but the kind of stuff that LLMs are able to do, seems fundamentally different than the common sense reasoning we use to navigate the world. It seems like we’re going to need both. Would you be able to get, with the joint embedding, which is JEPA type of approach, looking at video, would you be able to learn, let’s see, well, how to get from New York to Paris or how to understand the state of politics in the world today. These are things where various humans generate a lot of language and opinions on, in the space of language, but don’t visually represent that in any clearly compressible way.
Okay, but you really think it’s possible to get far with the joint embedding representation. So there’s common sense reasoning, and then there’s high level reasoning. I feel like those are two… The kind of reasoning that LLMs are able to do, okay, let me not use the word reasoning, but the kind of stuff that LLMs are able to do, seems fundamentally different than the common sense reasoning we use to navigate the world. It seems like we’re going to need both. Would you be able to get, with the joint embedding, which is JEPA type of approach, looking at video, would you be able to learn, let’s see, well, how to get from New York to Paris or how to understand the state of politics in the world today. These are things where various humans generate a lot of language and opinions on, in the space of language, but don’t visually represent that in any clearly compressible way.
Yann LeCun
Right. Well, there’s a lot of situations that might be difficult to, for a purely language based system to know. Okay, you can probably learn from reading texts, the entirety of the publicly available texts in the world that I cannot get from New York to Paris by snapping my fingers. That’s not going to work, right?
Right. Well, there’s a lot of situations that might be difficult to, for a purely language based system to know. Okay, you can probably learn from reading texts, the entirety of the publicly available texts in the world that I cannot get from New York to Paris by snapping my fingers. That’s not going to work, right?
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Yann LeCun
But there’s probably more complex scenarios of this type, which an LLM may never have encountered and may not be able to determine whether it’s possible or not. So that link from the low level to the high level, the thing is that the high level that language expresses is based on the common experience of the low level, which LLMs currently do not have. When we talk to each other, we know we have a common experience of the world. A lot of it is similar, and LLMs don’t have that.
But there’s probably more complex scenarios of this type, which an LLM may never have encountered and may not be able to determine whether it’s possible or not. So that link from the low level to the high level, the thing is that the high level that language expresses is based on the common experience of the low level, which LLMs currently do not have. When we talk to each other, we know we have a common experience of the world. A lot of it is similar, and LLMs don’t have that.
Lex Fridman
But see, it’s present. You and I have a common experience of the world in terms of the physics of how gravity works and stuff like this, and that common knowledge of the world, I feel like is there, in the language. We don’t explicitly express it, but if you have a huge amount of text, you’re going to get this stuff that’s between the lines. In order to form a consistent world model, you’re going to have to understand how gravity works, even if you don’t have an explicit explanation of gravity. So even though in the case of gravity, there is explicit explanations of gravity in Wikipedia. But the stuff that we think of as common sense reasoning, I feel like to generate language correctly, you’re going to have to figure that out. Now, you could say as you have, there’s not enough text… Sorry, okay, so you don’t think so?
But see, it’s present. You and I have a common experience of the world in terms of the physics of how gravity works and stuff like this, and that common knowledge of the world, I feel like is there, in the language. We don’t explicitly express it, but if you have a huge amount of text, you’re going to get this stuff that’s between the lines. In order to form a consistent world model, you’re going to have to understand how gravity works, even if you don’t have an explicit explanation of gravity. So even though in the case of gravity, there is explicit explanations of gravity in Wikipedia. But the stuff that we think of as common sense reasoning, I feel like to generate language correctly, you’re going to have to figure that out. Now, you could say as you have, there’s not enough text… Sorry, okay, so you don’t think so?
Yann LeCun
No, I agree with what you just said, which is that to be able to do high level common sense, to have high level common sense, you need to have the low level common sense to build on top of.
No, I agree with what you just said, which is that to be able to do high level common sense, to have high level common sense, you need to have the low level common sense to build on top of.
Lex Fridman
But that’s not there.
But that’s not there.
Yann LeCun
And that’s not there in the LLMs. LLMs are purely trained from text. So then the other statement you made, I would not agree with, the fact that implicit in all languages in the world is the underlying reality, is a lot of underlying reality, which is not expressed in language.
And that’s not there in the LLMs. LLMs are purely trained from text. So then the other statement you made, I would not agree with, the fact that implicit in all languages in the world is the underlying reality, is a lot of underlying reality, which is not expressed in language.
Lex Fridman
Is that obvious to you?
Is that obvious to you?
Yann LeCun
Yeah, totally.
Yeah, totally.
Lex Fridman
So all the conversations we had… Okay, there’s the dark web, meaning whatever, the private conversations like DMs and stuff like this, which is much, much larger probably than what’s available, what LLMs are trained on.
So all the conversations we had… Okay, there’s the dark web, meaning whatever, the private conversations like DMs and stuff like this, which is much, much larger probably than what’s available, what LLMs are trained on.
Yann LeCun
You don’t need to communicate the stuff that is common, right?
You don’t need to communicate the stuff that is common, right?
Lex Fridman
But the humor, all of it, no, you do, you don’t need to, but it comes through. If I accidentally knock this over, you’ll probably make fun of me in the content of the you making fun of me will be explanation of the fact that cups fall, and then gravity works in this way. And then you’ll have some very vague information about what kind of things explode when they hit the ground. And then maybe you’ll make a joke about entropy or something like this, then we’ll never be able to reconstruct this again. You’ll make a little joke like this and there’ll be a trillion of other jokes. And from the jokes, you can piece together the fact that gravity works and mugs can break and all this kind of stuff. You don’t need to see, it’ll be very inefficient. It’s easier to knock the thing over, but I feel like it would be there if you have enough of that data.
But the humor, all of it, no, you do, you don’t need to, but it comes through. If I accidentally knock this over, you’ll probably make fun of me in the content of the you making fun of me will be explanation of the fact that cups fall, and then gravity works in this way. And then you’ll have some very vague information about what kind of things explode when they hit the ground. And then maybe you’ll make a joke about entropy or something like this, then we’ll never be able to reconstruct this again. You’ll make a little joke like this and there’ll be a trillion of other jokes. And from the jokes, you can piece together the fact that gravity works and mugs can break and all this kind of stuff. You don’t need to see, it’ll be very inefficient. It’s easier to knock the thing over, but I feel like it would be there if you have enough of that data.
Yann LeCun
I just think that most of the information of this type that we have accumulated when we were babies, it’s just not present in text, in any description, essentially.
I just think that most of the information of this type that we have accumulated when we were babies, it’s just not present in text, in any description, essentially.
Lex Fridman
And the sensory data is a much richer source for getting that kind of understanding.
And the sensory data is a much richer source for getting that kind of understanding.
Yann LeCun
I mean, there’s 16,000 hours of wake time of a 4-year-old and tend to do 15 bites going through vision, just vision, there is a similar bandwidth of touch and a little less through audio. And then text, language doesn’t come in until a year in life. And by the time you are nine years old, you’ve learned about gravity, you know about inertia, you know about gravity, the stability, you know about the distinction between animate and inanimate objects. You know by 18 months, you know about why people want to do things and you help them if they can’t. I mean, there’s a lot of things that you learn mostly by observation, really not even through interaction. In the first few months of life, babies don’t really have any influence on the world, they can only observe. And you accumulate a gigantic amount of knowledge just from that. So that’s what we’re missing from current AI systems.
I mean, there’s 16,000 hours of wake time of a 4-year-old and tend to do 15 bites going through vision, just vision, there is a similar bandwidth of touch and a little less through audio. And then text, language doesn’t come in until a year in life. And by the time you are nine years old, you’ve learned about gravity, you know about inertia, you know about gravity, the stability, you know about the distinction between animate and inanimate objects. You know by 18 months, you know about why people want to do things and you help them if they can’t. I mean, there’s a lot of things that you learn mostly by observation, really not even through interaction. In the first few months of life, babies don’t really have any influence on the world, they can only observe. And you accumulate a gigantic amount of knowledge just from that. So that’s what we’re missing from current AI systems.
AI hallucination
Lex Fridman
I think in one of your slides, you have this nice plot that is one of the ways you show that LLMs are limited. I wonder if you could talk about hallucinations from your perspectives, the why hallucinations happen from large language models and to what degree is that a fundamental flaw of large language models?
I think in one of your slides, you have this nice plot that is one of the ways you show that LLMs are limited. I wonder if you could talk about hallucinations from your perspectives, the why hallucinations happen from large language models and to what degree is that a fundamental flaw of large language models?
Yann LeCun
Right, so because of the autoregressive prediction, every time an produces a token or a word, there is some level of probability for that word to take you out of the set of reasonable answers. And if you assume, which is a very strong assumption, that the probability of such error is that those errors are independent across a sequence of tokens being produced. What that means is that every time you produce a token, the probability that you stay within the set of correct answer decreases and it decreases exponentially.
Right, so because of the autoregressive prediction, every time an produces a token or a word, there is some level of probability for that word to take you out of the set of reasonable answers. And if you assume, which is a very strong assumption, that the probability of such error is that those errors are independent across a sequence of tokens being produced. What that means is that every time you produce a token, the probability that you stay within the set of correct answer decreases and it decreases exponentially.
Lex Fridman
So there’s a strong, like you said, assumption there that if there’s a non-zero probability of making a mistake, which there appears to be, then there’s going to be a kind of drift.
So there’s a strong, like you said, assumption there that if there’s a non-zero probability of making a mistake, which there appears to be, then there’s going to be a kind of drift.
Yann LeCun
Yeah, and that drift is exponential. It’s like errors accumulate. So the probability that an answer would be nonsensical increases exponentially with the number of tokens.
Yeah, and that drift is exponential. It’s like errors accumulate. So the probability that an answer would be nonsensical increases exponentially with the number of tokens.
Lex Fridman
Is that obvious to you, by the way? Well, mathematically speaking maybe, but isn’t there a kind of gravitational pull towards the truth? Because on average, hopefully, the truth is well represented in the training set?
Is that obvious to you, by the way? Well, mathematically speaking maybe, but isn’t there a kind of gravitational pull towards the truth? Because on average, hopefully, the truth is well represented in the training set?
Yann LeCun
No, it’s basically a struggle against the curse of dimensionality. So the way you can correct for this is that you fine tune the system by having it produce answers for all kinds of questions that people might come up with.
No, it’s basically a struggle against the curse of dimensionality. So the way you can correct for this is that you fine tune the system by having it produce answers for all kinds of questions that people might come up with.
Yann LeCun
Having it produce answers for all kinds of questions that people might come up with. And people are people, so a lot of the questions that they have are very similar to each other, so you can probably cover 80% or whatever of questions that people will ask by collecting data and then you fine tune the system to produce good answers for all of those things, and it’s probably going to be able to learn that because it’s got a lot of capacity to learn. But then there is the enormous set of prompts that you have not covered during training, and that set is enormous, like within the set of all possible prompts, the proportion of prompts that have been used for training is absolutely tiny, it’s a tiny, tiny, tiny subset of all possible prompts.
Having it produce answers for all kinds of questions that people might come up with. And people are people, so a lot of the questions that they have are very similar to each other, so you can probably cover 80% or whatever of questions that people will ask by collecting data and then you fine tune the system to produce good answers for all of those things, and it’s probably going to be able to learn that because it’s got a lot of capacity to learn. But then there is the enormous set of prompts that you have not covered during training, and that set is enormous, like within the set of all possible prompts, the proportion of prompts that have been used for training is absolutely tiny, it’s a tiny, tiny, tiny subset of all possible prompts.
And so the system will behave properly on the prompts that has been either trained, pre-trained, or fine-tuned, but then there is an entire space of things that it cannot possibly have been trained on because the number is gigantic. So whatever training the system has been subject to produce appropriate answers, you can break it by finding out a prompt that will be outside of the set of prompts that’s been trained on, or things that are similar, and then it will just spew complete nonsense.
Lex Fridman
When you say prompt, do you mean that exact prompt or do you mean a prompt that’s in many parts, very different than? Is it that easy to ask a question or to say a thing that hasn’t been said before on the internet?
When you say prompt, do you mean that exact prompt or do you mean a prompt that’s in many parts, very different than? Is it that easy to ask a question or to say a thing that hasn’t been said before on the internet?
Yann LeCun
People have come up with things where you put essentially a random sequence of characters in the prompt and that’s enough to throw the system into a mode where it is going to answer something completely different than it would have answered without this. So that’s a way to jailbreak the system, basically go outside of its conditioning.
People have come up with things where you put essentially a random sequence of characters in the prompt and that’s enough to throw the system into a mode where it is going to answer something completely different than it would have answered without this. So that’s a way to jailbreak the system, basically go outside of its conditioning.
Lex Fridman
That’s a very clear demonstration of it, but of course, that goes outside of what is designed to do, right? If you actually stitch together reasonably grammatical sentences, is it that easy to break it?
That’s a very clear demonstration of it, but of course, that goes outside of what is designed to do, right? If you actually stitch together reasonably grammatical sentences, is it that easy to break it?
Yann LeCun
Yeah, some people have done things like, you write a sentence in English or you ask a question in English and it produces a perfectly fine answer and then you just substitute a few words by the same word in another language and all of a sudden the answer is complete nonsense.
Yeah, some people have done things like, you write a sentence in English or you ask a question in English and it produces a perfectly fine answer and then you just substitute a few words by the same word in another language and all of a sudden the answer is complete nonsense.
Lex Fridman
What I’m saying is, which fraction of prompts that humans are likely to generate are going to break the system?
What I’m saying is, which fraction of prompts that humans are likely to generate are going to break the system?
Yann LeCun
The problem is that there is a long tail, this is an issue that a lot of people have realized in social networks and stuff like that, which is there’s a very, very long tail of things that people will ask and you can fine tune the system for the 80% or whatever of the things that most people will ask. And then this long tail is so large that you’re not going to be able to fine tune the system for all the conditions. And in the end, the system ends up being a giant lookup table essentially, which is not really what you want, you want systems that can reason, certainly that can plan.
The problem is that there is a long tail, this is an issue that a lot of people have realized in social networks and stuff like that, which is there’s a very, very long tail of things that people will ask and you can fine tune the system for the 80% or whatever of the things that most people will ask. And then this long tail is so large that you’re not going to be able to fine tune the system for all the conditions. And in the end, the system ends up being a giant lookup table essentially, which is not really what you want, you want systems that can reason, certainly that can plan.
Reasoning in AI
The type of reasoning that takes place in LLM is very, very primitive, and the reason you can tell is primitive is because the amount of computation that is spent per token produced is constant. So if you ask a question and that question has an answer in a given number of token, the amount of computation devoted to computing that answer can be exactly estimated. It’s the size of the prediction network with its 36 layers or 92 layers or whatever it is multiply by number of tokens, that’s it. And so essentially, it doesn’t matter if the question being asked is simple to answer, complicated to answer, impossible to answer because it’s a decidable or something, the amount of computation the system will be able to devote to the answer is constant or is proportional to number of token produced in the answer. This is not the way we work, the way we reason is that when we’re faced with a complex problem or a complex question, we spend more time trying to solve it and answer it because it’s more difficult.
Lex Fridman
There’s a prediction element, there’s an iterative element where you’re adjusting your understanding of a thing by going over and over and over, there’s a hierarchical elements on. Does this mean it’s a fundamental flaw of LLMs or does it mean that-
There’s a prediction element, there’s an iterative element where you’re adjusting your understanding of a thing by going over and over and over, there’s a hierarchical elements on. Does this mean it’s a fundamental flaw of LLMs or does it mean that-
Yann LeCun
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
… There’s more part to that question, now you’re just behaving like an LLM, immediately answering. No, that it’s just the low level world model on top of which we can then build some of these kinds of mechanisms, like you said, persistent long-term memory or reasoning, so on. But we need that world model that comes from language. Maybe it is not so difficult to build this kind of reasoning system on top of a well constructed world model.
… There’s more part to that question, now you’re just behaving like an LLM, immediately answering. No, that it’s just the low level world model on top of which we can then build some of these kinds of mechanisms, like you said, persistent long-term memory or reasoning, so on. But we need that world model that comes from language. Maybe it is not so difficult to build this kind of reasoning system on top of a well constructed world model.
Yann LeCun
Whether it’s difficult or not, the near future will say because a lot of people are working on reasoning and planning abilities for dialogue systems. Even if we restrict ourselves to language, just having the ability to plan your answer before you answer in terms that are not necessarily linked with the language you’re going to use to produce the answer, so this idea of this mental model that allows you to plan what you’re going to say before you say it, that is very important. I think there’s going to be a lot of systems over the next few years that are going to have this capability, but the blueprint of those systems will be extremely different from auto aggressive LLMs.
Whether it’s difficult or not, the near future will say because a lot of people are working on reasoning and planning abilities for dialogue systems. Even if we restrict ourselves to language, just having the ability to plan your answer before you answer in terms that are not necessarily linked with the language you’re going to use to produce the answer, so this idea of this mental model that allows you to plan what you’re going to say before you say it, that is very important. I think there’s going to be a lot of systems over the next few years that are going to have this capability, but the blueprint of those systems will be extremely different from auto aggressive LLMs.
It’s the same difference as the difference between what psychologists call system one and system two in humans, so system one is the type of task that you can accomplish without deliberately consciously think about how you do them, you just do them, you’ve done them enough that you can just do it subconsciously without thinking about them. If you’re an experienced driver, you can drive without really thinking about it and you can talk to someone at the same time or listen to the radio. If you are a very experienced chess player, you can play against a non- experienced chess player without really thinking either, you just recognize the pattern and you play. That’s system one, so all the things that you do instinctively without really having to deliberately plan and think about it.
And then there is all the tasks where you need to plan, so if you are a not too experienced chess player or you are experienced where you play against another experienced chess player, you think about all kinds of options, you think about it for a while and you are much better if you have time to think about it than you are if you play blitz with limited time. So this type of deliberate planning, which uses your internal world model, that’s system two, this is what LMS currently cannot do. How do we get them to do this? How do we build a system that can do this kind of planning or reasoning that devotes more resources to complex problems than to simple problems? And it’s not going to be a regressive prediction of tokens, it’s going to be more something akin to inference of little variables in what used to be called probabilistic models or graphical models and things of that type.
Basically, the principle is like this, the prompt is like observed variables, and what the model does, is that basically, it can measure to what extent an answer is a good answer for a prompt. So think of it as some gigantic neural net, but it’s got only one output, and that output is a scaler number, which is, let’s say, zero, if the answer is a good answer for the question and a large number, if the answer is not a good answer for the question. Imagine you had this model, if you had such a model, you could use it to produce good answers, the way you would do is, produce the prompt and then search through the space of possible answers for one that minimizes that number, that’s called an energy based model.
Lex Fridman
But that energy based model would need the model constructed by the LLM?
But that energy based model would need the model constructed by the LLM?
Yann LeCun
Well, so really what you need to do would be to not search over possible strings of text that minimize that energy. But what you would do, we do this in abstract representation space, so in the space of abstract thoughts, you would elaborate a thought using this process of minimizing the output of your model, which is just a scaler, it’s an optimization process. So now the way the system produces its sensor is through optimization by minimizing an objective function basically. And we’re talking about inference, we’re not talking about training, the system has been trained already.
Well, so really what you need to do would be to not search over possible strings of text that minimize that energy. But what you would do, we do this in abstract representation space, so in the space of abstract thoughts, you would elaborate a thought using this process of minimizing the output of your model, which is just a scaler, it’s an optimization process. So now the way the system produces its sensor is through optimization by minimizing an objective function basically. And we’re talking about inference, we’re not talking about training, the system has been trained already.
Now we have an abstract representation of the thought of the answer, representation of the answer, we feed that to basically an autoregressive decoder, which can be very simple, that turns this into a text that expresses this thought. So that, in my opinion, is the blueprint of future data systems, they will think about their answer, plan their answer by optimization before turning it into text, and that is turning complete.
Lex Fridman
Can you explain exactly what the optimization problem there is? What’s the objective function? Just linger on it, you briefly described it, but over what space are you optimizing?
Can you explain exactly what the optimization problem there is? What’s the objective function? Just linger on it, you briefly described it, but over what space are you optimizing?
Yann LeCun
The space of representations.
The space of representations.
Lex Fridman
It goes abstract representation?
It goes abstract representation?
Yann LeCun
You have an abstract representation inside the system, you have a prompt, the prompt goes through an encoder, produces a representation, perhaps goes through a predictor that predicts a representation of the proper answer. But that representation may not be a good answer because there might be some complicated reasoning you need to do, so then you have another process that takes the representation of the answers and modifies it so as to minimize a cost function that measures to what extent the answer is a good answer for the question. Now we ignore the issue for a moment of how you train that system to measure whether an answer is a good answer for a fraction.
You have an abstract representation inside the system, you have a prompt, the prompt goes through an encoder, produces a representation, perhaps goes through a predictor that predicts a representation of the proper answer. But that representation may not be a good answer because there might be some complicated reasoning you need to do, so then you have another process that takes the representation of the answers and modifies it so as to minimize a cost function that measures to what extent the answer is a good answer for the question. Now we ignore the issue for a moment of how you train that system to measure whether an answer is a good answer for a fraction.
Lex Fridman
Sure. Suppose such a system could be created, but what’s this search like process?
Sure. Suppose such a system could be created, but what’s this search like process?
Yann LeCun
It’s an optimization process. You can do this if the entire system is differentiable, that scaler output is the result of running the representation of the answers to some neural net. Then by gradient descent, by back propagating gradients, you can figure out how to modify the representation of the answers so as to minimize that.
It’s an optimization process. You can do this if the entire system is differentiable, that scaler output is the result of running the representation of the answers to some neural net. Then by gradient descent, by back propagating gradients, you can figure out how to modify the representation of the answers so as to minimize that.
Lex Fridman
That’s still a gradient based?
That’s still a gradient based?
Yann LeCun
It’s gradient based inference. So now you have a representation of the answer in abstract space, now you can turn it into text. And the cool thing about this is that the representation now can be optimized through gradient descent, but also is independent of the language in which you’re going to express the answer.
It’s gradient based inference. So now you have a representation of the answer in abstract space, now you can turn it into text. And the cool thing about this is that the representation now can be optimized through gradient descent, but also is independent of the language in which you’re going to express the answer.
Lex Fridman
Right. So you’re operating in the subtract representation. This goes back to the joint embedding, that it’s better to work in the space of, I don’t know, or to romanticize the notion like space of concepts versus the space of concrete sensory information.
Right. So you’re operating in the subtract representation. This goes back to the joint embedding, that it’s better to work in the space of, I don’t know, or to romanticize the notion like space of concepts versus the space of concrete sensory information.
Yann LeCun
Right.
Right.
Lex Fridman
But can this do something like reasoning, which is what we’re talking about?
But can this do something like reasoning, which is what we’re talking about?
Yann LeCun
Well, not really, only in a very simple way. Basically, you can think of those things as doing the optimization I was talking about, except they optimize in the discrete space, which is the space of possible sequences of tokens. And they do this optimization in a horribly inefficient way, which is generate a lot of hypothesis and then select the best ones. And that’s incredibly wasteful in terms of competition because you basically have to run your LLM for every possible generative sequence and it’s incredibly wasteful. So it’s much better to do an optimization in continuous space where you can do gradient and descent as opposed to generate tons of things and then select the best, you just iteratively refine your answer to go towards the best, that’s much more efficient. But you can only do this in continuous spaces with differentiable functions.
Well, not really, only in a very simple way. Basically, you can think of those things as doing the optimization I was talking about, except they optimize in the discrete space, which is the space of possible sequences of tokens. And they do this optimization in a horribly inefficient way, which is generate a lot of hypothesis and then select the best ones. And that’s incredibly wasteful in terms of competition because you basically have to run your LLM for every possible generative sequence and it’s incredibly wasteful. So it’s much better to do an optimization in continuous space where you can do gradient and descent as opposed to generate tons of things and then select the best, you just iteratively refine your answer to go towards the best, that’s much more efficient. But you can only do this in continuous spaces with differentiable functions.
Lex Fridman
You’re talking about the ability to think deeply or to reason deeply, how do you know what is an answer that’s better or worse based on deep reasoning?
You’re talking about the ability to think deeply or to reason deeply, how do you know what is an answer that’s better or worse based on deep reasoning?
Yann LeCun
Then we are asking the question of, conceptually, how do you train an energy based model? Energy based model is a function with a scaler output, just a number, you give it two inputs, X and Y, and it tells you whether Y is compatible with X or not. X, you observe, let’s say it’s a prompt, an image, a video, whatever, and Y is a proposal for an answer, a continuation of video, whatever and it tells you whether Y is compatible with X. And the way it tells you that Y is compatible with X is that the output of that function would be zero if Y is compatible with X and would be a positive number, non-zero, if Y is not compatible with X.
Then we are asking the question of, conceptually, how do you train an energy based model? Energy based model is a function with a scaler output, just a number, you give it two inputs, X and Y, and it tells you whether Y is compatible with X or not. X, you observe, let’s say it’s a prompt, an image, a video, whatever, and Y is a proposal for an answer, a continuation of video, whatever and it tells you whether Y is compatible with X. And the way it tells you that Y is compatible with X is that the output of that function would be zero if Y is compatible with X and would be a positive number, non-zero, if Y is not compatible with X.
How do you train a system like this at a completely general level, is you show it pairs of X and Ys that are compatible, a question and the corresponding answer, and you train the parameters of the big neural net inside to produce zero. Now that doesn’t completely work because the system might decide, well, I’m just going to say zero for everything, so now you have to have a process to make sure that for a wrong Y, the energy would be larger than zero. And there you have two options, one is contrastive method, so contrastive method is, you show an X and a bad Y and you tell the system, well, give a high energy to this, push up the energy, change the weights in the neural net that confuse the energy so that it goes up. So that’s contrasting methods.
The problem with this is, if the space of Y is large, the number of such contrasting samples are going to have to show is gigantic. But people do this, they do this when you train a system with RLHF, basically what you’re training is what’s called a reward model, which is basically an objective function that tells you whether an answer is good or bad, and that’s basically exactly what this is. So we already do this to some extent, we’re just not using it for inference, we’re just using it for training.
There is another set of methods which are non-contrastive, and I prefer those, and those non-contrastive methods basically say, the energy function needs to have low energy on pairs of XYs that are compatible that come from your training set. How do you make sure that the energy is going to be higher everywhere else? And the way you do this is by having a regularizer, a criterion, a term in your cost function that basically minimizes the volume of space that can take low energy. And the precise way to do this is all kinds of different specific ways to do this depending on the architecture, but that’s the basic principle. So that if you push down the energy function for particular regions in the XY space, it will automatically go up in other places because there’s only a limited volume of space that can take low energy by the construction of the system or by the regularizing function.
Lex Fridman
We’ve been talking very generally, but what is a good X and a good Y? What is a good representation of X and Y? Because we’ve been talking about language and if you just take language directly that presumably is not good, so there has to be some kind of abstract representation of ideas.
We’ve been talking very generally, but what is a good X and a good Y? What is a good representation of X and Y? Because we’ve been talking about language and if you just take language directly that presumably is not good, so there has to be some kind of abstract representation of ideas.
Yann LeCun
You can do this with language directly by just, X is a text and Y is a continuation of that text.
You can do this with language directly by just, X is a text and Y is a continuation of that text.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Yann LeCun
Or X is a question, Y is the answer.
Or X is a question, Y is the answer.
Lex Fridman
But you’re saying that’s not going to take it, that’s going to do what LLMs are doing.
But you’re saying that’s not going to take it, that’s going to do what LLMs are doing.
Yann LeCun
Well, no, it depends on how the internal structure of the system is built. If the internal structure of the system is built in such a way that inside of the system there is a latent variable, let’s call it Z, that you can manipulate so as to minimize the output energy, then that Z can be viewed as a representation of a good answer that you can translate into a Y that is a good answer.
Well, no, it depends on how the internal structure of the system is built. If the internal structure of the system is built in such a way that inside of the system there is a latent variable, let’s call it Z, that you can manipulate so as to minimize the output energy, then that Z can be viewed as a representation of a good answer that you can translate into a Y that is a good answer.
Lex Fridman
This system could be trained in a very similar way?
This system could be trained in a very similar way?
Yann LeCun
Very similar way, but you have to have this way preventing collapse of ensuring that there is high energy for things you don’t train it on. And currently, it’s very implicit in LLM, it’s done in a way that people don’t realize it’s being done, but it is being done. It is due to the fact that when you give a high probability to a word, automatically, you give low probability to other words because you only have a finite amount of probability to go around right there to sum to one. So when you minimize the cross entropy or whatever, when you train your LLM to predict the next word, you are increasing the probability your system will give to the correct word, but you’re also decreasing the probability it will give to the incorrect words.
Very similar way, but you have to have this way preventing collapse of ensuring that there is high energy for things you don’t train it on. And currently, it’s very implicit in LLM, it’s done in a way that people don’t realize it’s being done, but it is being done. It is due to the fact that when you give a high probability to a word, automatically, you give low probability to other words because you only have a finite amount of probability to go around right there to sum to one. So when you minimize the cross entropy or whatever, when you train your LLM to predict the next word, you are increasing the probability your system will give to the correct word, but you’re also decreasing the probability it will give to the incorrect words.
Now, indirectly, that gives a high probability to sequences of words that are good and low probability to sequences of words that are bad, but it’s very indirect. And it’s not obvious why this actually works at all because you’re not doing it on the joint probability of all the symbols in a sequence, you factorize that probability in terms of conditional probabilities over successive tokens.
Lex Fridman
How do you do this for visual data?
How do you do this for visual data?
Yann LeCun
We’ve been doing this with I-JEPA architectures, basically-
We’ve been doing this with I-JEPA architectures, basically-
Lex Fridman
The joint embedding.
The joint embedding.
Yann LeCun
… I-JEPA. So there the compatibility between two things is, here’s an image or a video, here is a corrupted, shifted or transformed version of that image or video or masked. And then the energy of the system is the prediction error of the predicted representation of the good thing versus the actual representation of the good thing. So you run the corrupted image to the system, predict the representation of the good input uncorrupted, and then compute the prediction error, that’s the energy of the system. So this system will tell you if this is a good image and this is a corrupted version, it will give you zero energy if those two things, effectively, one of them is a corrupted version of the other, it gives you a high energy if the two images are completely different.
… I-JEPA. So there the compatibility between two things is, here’s an image or a video, here is a corrupted, shifted or transformed version of that image or video or masked. And then the energy of the system is the prediction error of the predicted representation of the good thing versus the actual representation of the good thing. So you run the corrupted image to the system, predict the representation of the good input uncorrupted, and then compute the prediction error, that’s the energy of the system. So this system will tell you if this is a good image and this is a corrupted version, it will give you zero energy if those two things, effectively, one of them is a corrupted version of the other, it gives you a high energy if the two images are completely different.
Lex Fridman
And hopefully that whole process gives you a really nice compressed representation of a visual reality?
And hopefully that whole process gives you a really nice compressed representation of a visual reality?
Yann LeCun
And we know it does because then we use those representations as input to a classification system or something and that it works.
And we know it does because then we use those representations as input to a classification system or something and that it works.
Reinforcement learning
Lex Fridman
And then that classification system works really nicely, okay. Well, so to summarize, you recommend in a spicy way that only Yann LeCun can, you recommend that we abandon generative models in favor of joint embedding architectures?
And then that classification system works really nicely, okay. Well, so to summarize, you recommend in a spicy way that only Yann LeCun can, you recommend that we abandon generative models in favor of joint embedding architectures?
Yann LeCun
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Abandon autoregressive generation.
Abandon autoregressive generation.
Yann LeCun
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
This feels like court testimony, abandon probabilistic models in favor of energy based models as we talked about, abandon contrastive methods in favor of regularized methods. And let me ask you about this, you’ve been for a while, a critic of reinforcement learning.
This feels like court testimony, abandon probabilistic models in favor of energy based models as we talked about, abandon contrastive methods in favor of regularized methods. And let me ask you about this, you’ve been for a while, a critic of reinforcement learning.
Yann LeCun
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
The last recommendation is that we abandon RL in favor of model predictive control, as you were talking about, and only use RL when planning doesn’t yield the predicted outcome, and we use RL in that case to adjust the world model or the critic.
The last recommendation is that we abandon RL in favor of model predictive control, as you were talking about, and only use RL when planning doesn’t yield the predicted outcome, and we use RL in that case to adjust the world model or the critic.
Yann LeCun
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
You’ve mentioned RLHF, reinforcement learning with human feedback, why do you still hate reinforcement learning?
You’ve mentioned RLHF, reinforcement learning with human feedback, why do you still hate reinforcement learning?
Yann LeCun
I don’t hate reinforcement learning, and I think-
I don’t hate reinforcement learning, and I think-
Lex Fridman
It’s all love, yes.
It’s all love, yes.
Yann LeCun
… I think it should not be abandoned completely, but I think it’s use should be minimized because it’s incredibly inefficient in terms of samples. And so the proper way to train a system is to first have it learn good representations of the world and world models from mostly observation, maybe a little bit of interactions.
… I think it should not be abandoned completely, but I think it’s use should be minimized because it’s incredibly inefficient in terms of samples. And so the proper way to train a system is to first have it learn good representations of the world and world models from mostly observation, maybe a little bit of interactions.
Lex Fridman
And then steered based on that, if the representation is good, then the adjustments should be minimal.
And then steered based on that, if the representation is good, then the adjustments should be minimal.
Yann LeCun
Yeah. Now there’s two things, if you’ve learned a world model, you can use the world model to plan a sequence of actions to arrive at a particular objective, you don’t need RL unless the way you measure whether you succeed might be in exact. Your idea of whether you are going to fall from your bike might be wrong, or whether the person you’re fighting with MMA who’s going to do something and they do something else. So there’s two ways you can be wrong, either your objective function does not reflect the actual objective function you want to optimize or your world model is inaccurate, so the prediction you were making about what was going to happen in the world is inaccurate.
Yeah. Now there’s two things, if you’ve learned a world model, you can use the world model to plan a sequence of actions to arrive at a particular objective, you don’t need RL unless the way you measure whether you succeed might be in exact. Your idea of whether you are going to fall from your bike might be wrong, or whether the person you’re fighting with MMA who’s going to do something and they do something else. So there’s two ways you can be wrong, either your objective function does not reflect the actual objective function you want to optimize or your world model is inaccurate, so the prediction you were making about what was going to happen in the world is inaccurate.
If you want to adjust your world model while you are operating in the world or your objective function, that is basically in the realm of RL, this is what RL deals with to some extent, so adjust your word model. And the way to adjust your word model even in advance is to explore parts of the space where you know that your world model is inaccurate, that’s called curiosity basically, or play. When you play, you explore parts of the space that you don’t want to do for real because it might be dangerous, but you can adjust your world model without killing yourself basically. So that’s what you want to use RL for, when it comes time to learning a particular task, you already have all the good representations, you already have your world model, but you need to adjust it for the situation at hand, that’s when you use RL.
Lex Fridman
Why do you think RLHF works so well? This enforcement learning with human feedback, why did it have such a transformational effect on large language models than before?
Why do you think RLHF works so well? This enforcement learning with human feedback, why did it have such a transformational effect on large language models than before?
Yann LeCun
What’s had the transformational effect is human feedback, there is many ways to use it, and some of it is just purely supervised, actually, it’s not really reinforcement learning.
What’s had the transformational effect is human feedback, there is many ways to use it, and some of it is just purely supervised, actually, it’s not really reinforcement learning.
Lex Fridman
It’s the HF?
It’s the HF?
Yann LeCun
It’s the HF, and then there is various ways to use human feedback. So you can ask humans to rate multiple answers that are produced by world model, and then what you do is you train an objective function to predict that rating, and then you can use that objective function to predict whether an answer is good and you can back propagate gradient to this to fine tune your system so that it only produces highly rated answers. That’s one way, so in RL, that means training what’s called a reward model, so something that basically is a small neural net that estimates to what extent an answer is good.
It’s the HF, and then there is various ways to use human feedback. So you can ask humans to rate multiple answers that are produced by world model, and then what you do is you train an objective function to predict that rating, and then you can use that objective function to predict whether an answer is good and you can back propagate gradient to this to fine tune your system so that it only produces highly rated answers. That’s one way, so in RL, that means training what’s called a reward model, so something that basically is a small neural net that estimates to what extent an answer is good.
It’s very similar to the objective I was talking about earlier for planning, except now it’s not used for planning, it’s used for fine-tuning your system. I think it would be much more efficient to use it for planning, but currently, it’s used to fine tune the parameters of the system. There’s several ways to do this, some of them are supervised, you just ask a human person like, what is a good answer for this? Then you just type the answer. There’s lots of ways that those systems are being adjusted.
Woke AI
Lex Fridman
Now, a lot of people have been very critical of the recently released Google’s Gemini 1.5 for essentially, in my words, I could say super woke in the negative connotation of that word. There is some almost hilariously absurd things that it does, like it modifies history like generating images of a black George Washington, or perhaps more seriously something that you commented on Twitter, which is refusing to comment on or generate images or even descriptions of Tiananmen Square or The Tank Man, one of the most legendary protest images in history. Of course, these images are highly censored by the Chinese government and therefore, everybody started asking questions of what is the process of designing these LLMs? What is the role of censorship and all that kind of stuff? So you commented on Twitter saying that open source is the answer.
Now, a lot of people have been very critical of the recently released Google’s Gemini 1.5 for essentially, in my words, I could say super woke in the negative connotation of that word. There is some almost hilariously absurd things that it does, like it modifies history like generating images of a black George Washington, or perhaps more seriously something that you commented on Twitter, which is refusing to comment on or generate images or even descriptions of Tiananmen Square or The Tank Man, one of the most legendary protest images in history. Of course, these images are highly censored by the Chinese government and therefore, everybody started asking questions of what is the process of designing these LLMs? What is the role of censorship and all that kind of stuff? So you commented on Twitter saying that open source is the answer.
Yann LeCun
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Essentially, so can you explain?
Essentially, so can you explain?
Yann LeCun
I actually made that comment on just about every social network I can, and I’ve made that point multiple times in various forums. Here’s my point of view on this, people can complain that AI systems are biased and they generally are biased by the distribution of the training data that they’ve been trained on that reflects biases in society, and that is potentially offensive to some people or potentially not. And some techniques to de-bias then become offensive to some people because of historical incorrectness and things like that.
I actually made that comment on just about every social network I can, and I’ve made that point multiple times in various forums. Here’s my point of view on this, people can complain that AI systems are biased and they generally are biased by the distribution of the training data that they’ve been trained on that reflects biases in society, and that is potentially offensive to some people or potentially not. And some techniques to de-bias then become offensive to some people because of historical incorrectness and things like that.
And so you can ask two questions, the first question is, is it possible to produce an AI system that is not biased? And the answer is, absolutely not. And it’s not because of technological challenges, although they are technological challenges to that, it’s because bias is in the eye of the beholder. Different people may have different ideas about what constitutes bias for a lot of things, there are facts that are indisputable, but there are a lot of opinions or things that can be expressed in different ways. And so you cannot have an unbiased system, that’s just an impossibility.
And so what’s the answer to this? And the answer is the same answer that we found in liberal democracy about the press, the press needs to be free and diverse. We have free speech for a good reason, is because we don’t want all of our information to come from a unique source because that’s opposite to the whole idea of democracy and progressive ideas and even science. In science, people have to argue for different opinions and science makes progress when people disagree and they come up with an answer and consensus forms, and it’s true in all democracies around the world.
There is a future which is already happening where every single one of our interaction with the digital world will be mediated by AI systems, AI assistance. We’re going to have smart glasses, you can already buy them from Meta, the Ray-Ban Meta where you can talk to them and they are connected with an LLM and you can get answers on any question you have. Or you can be looking at a monument and there is a camera in the glasses you can ask it like, what can you tell me about this building or this monument? You can be looking at a menu in a foreign language, and I think we will translate it for you, or we can do real time translation if we speak different languages. So a lot of our interactions with the digital world are going to be mediated by those systems in the near future.
Increasingly, the search engines that we’re going to use are not going to be search engines, they’re going to be dialogue systems that we just ask a question and it will answer and then point you to perhaps appropriate reference for it. But here is the thing, we cannot afford those systems to come from a handful of companies on the west coast of the US because those systems will constitute the repository of all human knowledge, and we cannot have that be controlled by a small number of people. It has to be diverse for the same reason the press has to be diverse, so how do we get a diverse set of AI assistance? It’s very expensive and difficult to train a base model, a base LLM at the moment, in the future it might be something different, but at the moment, that’s an LLM. So only a few companies can do this properly.
And if some of those top systems are open source, anybody can use them, anybody can fine tune them. If we put in place some systems that allows any group of people, whether they are individual citizens, groups of citizens, government organizations, NGOs, companies, whatever, to take those open source AI systems and fine tune them for their own purpose on their own data, then we’re going to have a very large diversity of different AI systems that are specialized for all of those things.
I tell you, I talked to the French government quite a bit, and the French government will not accept that the digital diet of all their citizens be controlled by three companies on the west coast of the US. That’s just not acceptable, it’s a danger to democracy regardless of how well-intentioned those companies are, and it’s also a danger to local culture, to values, to language. I was talking with the founder of Infosys in India, he’s funding a project to fine tune Llama 2, the open source model produced by Meta, so that Llama 2 two speaks all 22 official languages in India, it is very important for people in India. I was talking to a former colleague of mine, Moustapha Cisse, who used to be a scientist at Fair and then moved back to Africa, created a research lab for Google in Africa and now has a new startup Co-Kera.
And what he’s trying to do, is basically have LLM that speak the local languages in Senegal so that people can have access to medical information because they don’t have access to doctors, it’s a very small number of doctors per capita in Senegal. You can’t have any of this unless you have open source platforms, so with open source platforms, you can have AI systems that are not only diverse in terms of political opinions or things of that-
Yann LeCun
… AI systems that are not only diverse in terms of political opinions or things of that type, but in terms of language, culture, value systems, political opinions, technical abilities in various domains, and you can have an industry, an ecosystem of companies that fine tune those open source systems for vertical applications in industry. I don’t know, a publisher has thousands of books and they want to build a system that allows a customer to just ask a question about the content of any of their books, you need to train on their proprietary data. You have a company, we have one within Meta, it’s called Metamate, and it’s basically an LLM that can answer any question about internal stuff about the company, very useful.
… AI systems that are not only diverse in terms of political opinions or things of that type, but in terms of language, culture, value systems, political opinions, technical abilities in various domains, and you can have an industry, an ecosystem of companies that fine tune those open source systems for vertical applications in industry. I don’t know, a publisher has thousands of books and they want to build a system that allows a customer to just ask a question about the content of any of their books, you need to train on their proprietary data. You have a company, we have one within Meta, it’s called Metamate, and it’s basically an LLM that can answer any question about internal stuff about the company, very useful.
A lot of companies want this. A lot of companies want this not just for their employees, but also for their customers, to take care of their customers. So the only way you’re going to have an AI industry, the only way you’re going to have AI systems that are not uniquely biased is if you have open source platforms on top of which any group can build specialized systems. So the direction of inevitable direction of history is that the vast majority of AI systems will be built on top of open source platforms.
Lex Fridman
So that’s a beautiful vision. So meaning a company like Meta or Google or so on should take only minimal fine-tuning steps after building the foundation pre-trained model as few steps as possible.
So that’s a beautiful vision. So meaning a company like Meta or Google or so on should take only minimal fine-tuning steps after building the foundation pre-trained model as few steps as possible.
Open source
Yann LeCun
Basically.
Basically.
Lex Fridman
Can Meta afford to do that?
Can Meta afford to do that?
Yann LeCun
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
So I don’t know if you know this, but companies are supposed to make money somehow and open source is giving away… I don’t know. Mark made a video, Mark Zuckerberg, very sexy video talking about 350,000 Nvidia H100s.
So I don’t know if you know this, but companies are supposed to make money somehow and open source is giving away… I don’t know. Mark made a video, Mark Zuckerberg, very sexy video talking about 350,000 Nvidia H100s.
Yann LeCun
Yeah, [inaudible 01:44:12]
Yeah, [inaudible 01:44:12]
Lex Fridman
The math of that is just for the GPUs, that’s 100 billion plus the infrastructure for training everything. So I’m no business guy, but how do you make money on that? So the division you paint is a really powerful one, but how is it possible to make money?
The math of that is just for the GPUs, that’s 100 billion plus the infrastructure for training everything. So I’m no business guy, but how do you make money on that? So the division you paint is a really powerful one, but how is it possible to make money?
Yann LeCun
Okay, so you have several business models, right?
Okay, so you have several business models, right?
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Yann LeCun
The business model that Meta is built around is you offer a service and the financing of that service is either through ads or through business customers. So for example, if you have an LLM that can help a mom-and-pop pizza place by talking to the customers through WhatsApp, and so the customers can just order a pizza and the system will just ask them, “What topping do you want or what size, blah, blah, blah.” The business will pay for that, okay? That’s a model. Otherwise, if it’s a system that is on the more classical services, it can be ad supported or there’s several models. But the point is, if you have a big enough potential customer base and you need to build that system anyway for them, it doesn’t hurt you to actually distribute it to the open source.
The business model that Meta is built around is you offer a service and the financing of that service is either through ads or through business customers. So for example, if you have an LLM that can help a mom-and-pop pizza place by talking to the customers through WhatsApp, and so the customers can just order a pizza and the system will just ask them, “What topping do you want or what size, blah, blah, blah.” The business will pay for that, okay? That’s a model. Otherwise, if it’s a system that is on the more classical services, it can be ad supported or there’s several models. But the point is, if you have a big enough potential customer base and you need to build that system anyway for them, it doesn’t hurt you to actually distribute it to the open source.
Lex Fridman
Again, I’m no business guy, but if you release the open source model, then other people can do the same kind of task and compete on it, basically provide fine-tuned models for businesses.
Again, I’m no business guy, but if you release the open source model, then other people can do the same kind of task and compete on it, basically provide fine-tuned models for businesses.
Yann LeCun
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
By the way, I’m a huge fan of all this, but is the bet that Meta is making, it’s like, “We’ll do a better job of it?”
By the way, I’m a huge fan of all this, but is the bet that Meta is making, it’s like, “We’ll do a better job of it?”
Yann LeCun
Well, no. The bet is more, “We already have a huge user base and customer base-
Well, no. The bet is more, “We already have a huge user base and customer base-
Lex Fridman
Ah, right.
Ah, right.
Yann LeCun
… so it’s going to be useful to them. Whatever we offer them is going to be useful and there is a way to derive revenue from this.
… so it’s going to be useful to them. Whatever we offer them is going to be useful and there is a way to derive revenue from this.
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
Yann LeCun
It doesn’t hurt that we provide that system or the base model, the foundation model in open source for others to build applications on top of it too. If those applications turn out to be useful for our customers, we can just buy it from them. It could be that they will improve the platform. In fact, we see this already. There is literally millions of downloads of LLaMA 2 and thousands of people who have provided ideas about how to make it better. So this clearly accelerates progress to make the system available to a wide community of people, and there’s literally thousands of businesses who are building applications with it. So Meta’s ability to derive revenue from this technology is not impaired by the distribution of base models in open source.
It doesn’t hurt that we provide that system or the base model, the foundation model in open source for others to build applications on top of it too. If those applications turn out to be useful for our customers, we can just buy it from them. It could be that they will improve the platform. In fact, we see this already. There is literally millions of downloads of LLaMA 2 and thousands of people who have provided ideas about how to make it better. So this clearly accelerates progress to make the system available to a wide community of people, and there’s literally thousands of businesses who are building applications with it. So Meta’s ability to derive revenue from this technology is not impaired by the distribution of base models in open source.
AI and ideology
Lex Fridman
The fundamental criticism that Gemini is getting is that as you point out on the West Coast, just to clarify, we’re currently on the East Coast where I would suppose Meta AI headquarters would be. So there are strong words about the West Coast, but I guess the issue that happens is I think it’s fair to say that most tech people have a political affiliation with the left wing. They lean left. So the problem that people are criticizing Gemini with is that there’s in that de-biasing process that you mentioned, that their ideological lean becomes obvious. Is this something that could be escaped? You’re saying open source is the only way.
The fundamental criticism that Gemini is getting is that as you point out on the West Coast, just to clarify, we’re currently on the East Coast where I would suppose Meta AI headquarters would be. So there are strong words about the West Coast, but I guess the issue that happens is I think it’s fair to say that most tech people have a political affiliation with the left wing. They lean left. So the problem that people are criticizing Gemini with is that there’s in that de-biasing process that you mentioned, that their ideological lean becomes obvious. Is this something that could be escaped? You’re saying open source is the only way.
Yann LeCun
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Have you witnessed this kind of ideological lean that makes engineering difficult?
Have you witnessed this kind of ideological lean that makes engineering difficult?
Yann LeCun
No, I don’t think the issue has to do with the political leaning of the people designing those systems. It has to do with the acceptability or political leanings of their customer base or audience. So a big company cannot afford to offend too many people, so they’re going to make sure that whatever product they put out is safe, whatever that means. It’s very possible to overdo it, and it’s impossible to do it properly for everyone. You’re not going to satisfy everyone. So that’s what I said before, you cannot have a system that is perceived as unbiased by everyone. It’s going to be you push it in one way, one set of people are going to see it as biased, and then you push it the other way and another set of people is going to see it as biased. Then in addition to this, there’s the issue of if you push the system perhaps a little too far in one direction, it’s going to be non-factual. You’re going to have Black Nazi soldiers in uniform.
No, I don’t think the issue has to do with the political leaning of the people designing those systems. It has to do with the acceptability or political leanings of their customer base or audience. So a big company cannot afford to offend too many people, so they’re going to make sure that whatever product they put out is safe, whatever that means. It’s very possible to overdo it, and it’s impossible to do it properly for everyone. You’re not going to satisfy everyone. So that’s what I said before, you cannot have a system that is perceived as unbiased by everyone. It’s going to be you push it in one way, one set of people are going to see it as biased, and then you push it the other way and another set of people is going to see it as biased. Then in addition to this, there’s the issue of if you push the system perhaps a little too far in one direction, it’s going to be non-factual. You’re going to have Black Nazi soldiers in uniform.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, we so we should mention image generation of Black Nazi soldiers, which is not factually accurate.
Yeah, we so we should mention image generation of Black Nazi soldiers, which is not factually accurate.
Yann LeCun
Right, and can be offensive for some people as well. So it’s going to be impossible to produce systems that are unbiased for everyone. So the only solution that I see is diversity.
Right, and can be offensive for some people as well. So it’s going to be impossible to produce systems that are unbiased for everyone. So the only solution that I see is diversity.
Lex Fridman
Diversity in the full meaning of that word, diversity of in every possible way.
Diversity in the full meaning of that word, diversity of in every possible way.
Marc Andreesen
Yann LeCun
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Marc Andreessen just tweeted today. Let me do a TL;DR. The conclusion is only startups and open source can avoid the issue that he’s highlighting with big tech. He’s asking, “Can Big Tech actually field generative AI products?” (1) Ever-escalating demands from internal activists, employee mobs, crazed executives, broken boards, pressure groups, extremist regulators, government agencies, the press, in quotes, “experts” and everything corrupting the output. (2) Constant risk of generating a bad answer or drawing a bad picture or rendering a bad video who knows what is going to say or do at any moment. (3) Legal exposure, product liability, slander, election law, many other things and so on, anything that makes Congress mad. (4) Continuous attempts to tighten grip on acceptable output, degrade the model, how good it actually is, in terms of usable and pleasant to use and effective and all that kind of stuff. (5) Publicity of bad text, images, video actual puts those examples into the training data for the next version and so on. So he just highlights how difficult this is from all kinds of people being unhappy. He said you can’t create a system that makes everybody happy.
Marc Andreessen just tweeted today. Let me do a TL;DR. The conclusion is only startups and open source can avoid the issue that he’s highlighting with big tech. He’s asking, “Can Big Tech actually field generative AI products?” (1) Ever-escalating demands from internal activists, employee mobs, crazed executives, broken boards, pressure groups, extremist regulators, government agencies, the press, in quotes, “experts” and everything corrupting the output. (2) Constant risk of generating a bad answer or drawing a bad picture or rendering a bad video who knows what is going to say or do at any moment. (3) Legal exposure, product liability, slander, election law, many other things and so on, anything that makes Congress mad. (4) Continuous attempts to tighten grip on acceptable output, degrade the model, how good it actually is, in terms of usable and pleasant to use and effective and all that kind of stuff. (5) Publicity of bad text, images, video actual puts those examples into the training data for the next version and so on. So he just highlights how difficult this is from all kinds of people being unhappy. He said you can’t create a system that makes everybody happy.
Yann LeCun
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
So if you’re going to do the fine-tuning yourself and keep it close source, essentially, the problem there is then trying to minimize the number of people who are going to be unhappy.
So if you’re going to do the fine-tuning yourself and keep it close source, essentially, the problem there is then trying to minimize the number of people who are going to be unhappy.
Yann LeCun
Yep.
Yep.
Lex Fridman
You’re saying that almost impossible to do, and there are better ways to do open source
You’re saying that almost impossible to do, and there are better ways to do open source
Yann LeCun
Basically. Yeah. Mark is right about a number of things that you list that indeed scare large companies. Certainly, congressional investigations is one of them, legal liability, making things that get people to hurt themselves or hurt others. Big companies are really careful about not producing things of this type because they don’t want to hurt anyone, first of all, and then second, they want to preserve their business. So it’s essentially impossible for systems like this that can inevitably formulate political opinions, and opinions about various things that may be political or not, but that people may disagree about, about moral issues and questions about religion and things like that or cultural issues that people from different communities would disagree with in the first place. So there’s only a relatively small number of things that people will agree on are basic principles, but beyond that, if you want those systems to be useful, they will necessarily have to offend a number of people inevitably.
Basically. Yeah. Mark is right about a number of things that you list that indeed scare large companies. Certainly, congressional investigations is one of them, legal liability, making things that get people to hurt themselves or hurt others. Big companies are really careful about not producing things of this type because they don’t want to hurt anyone, first of all, and then second, they want to preserve their business. So it’s essentially impossible for systems like this that can inevitably formulate political opinions, and opinions about various things that may be political or not, but that people may disagree about, about moral issues and questions about religion and things like that or cultural issues that people from different communities would disagree with in the first place. So there’s only a relatively small number of things that people will agree on are basic principles, but beyond that, if you want those systems to be useful, they will necessarily have to offend a number of people inevitably.
Lex Fridman
So open source is just better and then you get-
So open source is just better and then you get-
Yann LeCun
Diversity is better, right?
Diversity is better, right?
Lex Fridman
And open source enables diversity.
And open source enables diversity.
Yann LeCun
That’s right. Open source enables diversity.
That’s right. Open source enables diversity.
Lex Fridman
This can be a fascinating world where if it’s true that the open source world, if Meta leads the way and creates this open source foundation model world, governments will have a fine- tuned model and then potentially, people that vote left and right will have their own model and preference to be able to choose and it will potentially divide us even more. But that’s on us humans. We get to figure out basically the technology enables humans to human more effectively, and all the difficult ethical questions that humans raise will just leave it up to us to figure that out.
This can be a fascinating world where if it’s true that the open source world, if Meta leads the way and creates this open source foundation model world, governments will have a fine- tuned model and then potentially, people that vote left and right will have their own model and preference to be able to choose and it will potentially divide us even more. But that’s on us humans. We get to figure out basically the technology enables humans to human more effectively, and all the difficult ethical questions that humans raise will just leave it up to us to figure that out.
Yann LeCun
Yeah, there are some limits. The same way there are limits to free speech. There has to be some limit to the kind of stuff that those systems might be authorized to produce, some guardrails. So that’s one thing I’d be interested in, which is in the type of architecture that we were discussing before where the output of the system is a result of an inference to satisfy an objective, that objective can include guardrails, and we can put guardrails in open source systems. If we eventually have systems that are built with this blueprint, we can put guardrails in those systems that guarantee that there is a minimum set of guardrails that make the system non-dangerous and non-toxic, et cetera, basic things that everybody would agree on. Then the fine-tuning that people will add or the additional guardrails that people will add will cater to their community, whatever it is.
Yeah, there are some limits. The same way there are limits to free speech. There has to be some limit to the kind of stuff that those systems might be authorized to produce, some guardrails. So that’s one thing I’d be interested in, which is in the type of architecture that we were discussing before where the output of the system is a result of an inference to satisfy an objective, that objective can include guardrails, and we can put guardrails in open source systems. If we eventually have systems that are built with this blueprint, we can put guardrails in those systems that guarantee that there is a minimum set of guardrails that make the system non-dangerous and non-toxic, et cetera, basic things that everybody would agree on. Then the fine-tuning that people will add or the additional guardrails that people will add will cater to their community, whatever it is.
Lex Fridman
The fine-tuning will be more about the gray areas of what is hate speech, what is dangerous and all that kind of stuff, but it’s the-
The fine-tuning will be more about the gray areas of what is hate speech, what is dangerous and all that kind of stuff, but it’s the-
Yann LeCun
Or different value systems.
Or different value systems.
Lex Fridman
Still value systems. But still even with the objectives of how to build a bioweapon, for example, I think something you’ve commented on, or at least there’s a paper where a collection of researchers is trying to understand the social impacts of these LLMs. I guess one threshold that’s nice is, does the LLM make it any easier than a search would, like a Google search would?
Still value systems. But still even with the objectives of how to build a bioweapon, for example, I think something you’ve commented on, or at least there’s a paper where a collection of researchers is trying to understand the social impacts of these LLMs. I guess one threshold that’s nice is, does the LLM make it any easier than a search would, like a Google search would?
Yann LeCun
Right. So the increasing number of studies on this seems to point to the fact that it doesn’t help. So having an LLM doesn’t help you design or build a bioweapon or a chemical weapon if you already have access to a search engine and their library. So the increased information you get or the ease with which you get it doesn’t really help you. That’s the first thing. The second thing is, it’s one thing to have a list of instructions of how to make a chemical weapon, for example, a bioweapon. It’s another thing to actually build it, and it’s much harder than you might think, and then LLM will not help you with that.
Right. So the increasing number of studies on this seems to point to the fact that it doesn’t help. So having an LLM doesn’t help you design or build a bioweapon or a chemical weapon if you already have access to a search engine and their library. So the increased information you get or the ease with which you get it doesn’t really help you. That’s the first thing. The second thing is, it’s one thing to have a list of instructions of how to make a chemical weapon, for example, a bioweapon. It’s another thing to actually build it, and it’s much harder than you might think, and then LLM will not help you with that.
In fact, nobody in the world, not even countries used bioweapons because most of the time they have no idea how to protect their own populations against it. So it’s too dangerous, actually, to ever use, and it’s, in fact, banned by international treaties. Chemical weapons is different. It’s also banned by treaties, but it’s the same problem. It’s difficult to use in situations that doesn’t turn against the perpetrators, but we could ask Elon Musk. I can give you a very precise list of instructions of how you build a rocket engine. Even if you have a team of 50 engineers that are really experienced building it, you’re still going to have to blow up a dozen of them before you get one that works. It’s the same with chemical weapons or bioweapons or things like this, it requires expertise in the real world that the LLM is not going to help you with.
Lex Fridman
It requires even the common sense expertise that we’ve been talking about, which is how to take language-based instructions and materialize them in the physical world requires a lot of knowledge that’s not in the instructions.
It requires even the common sense expertise that we’ve been talking about, which is how to take language-based instructions and materialize them in the physical world requires a lot of knowledge that’s not in the instructions.
Yann LeCun
Yeah, exactly. A lot of biologists have posted on this actually, in response to those things saying, “Do you realize how hard it is to actually do the lab work?” Like, “No, this is not trivial.”
Yeah, exactly. A lot of biologists have posted on this actually, in response to those things saying, “Do you realize how hard it is to actually do the lab work?” Like, “No, this is not trivial.”
Llama 3
Lex Fridman
Yeah, and Hans Moravec comes to light once again. Just to linger on LLaMA, Marc announced that LLaMA 3 is coming out eventually. I don’t think there’s a release date, but what are you most excited about? First of all, LLaMA 2 that’s already out there and maybe the future a LLaMA 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, just the future of the open source under Meta?
Yeah, and Hans Moravec comes to light once again. Just to linger on LLaMA, Marc announced that LLaMA 3 is coming out eventually. I don’t think there’s a release date, but what are you most excited about? First of all, LLaMA 2 that’s already out there and maybe the future a LLaMA 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, just the future of the open source under Meta?
Yann LeCun
Well, a number of things. So there’s going to be various versions of LLaMA that are improvements of previous LLaMAs, bigger, better, multimodal, things like that. Then in future generations, systems that are capable of planning that really understand how the world works, maybe are trained from video, so they have some world model maybe capable of the type of reasoning and planning I was talking about earlier. How long is that going to take? When is the research that is going in that direction going to feed into the product line if you want of LLaMA? I don’t know. I can’t tell you. There’s a few breakthroughs that we have to basically go through before we can get there, but you’ll be able to monitor our progress because we publish our research. So last week we published the V-JEPA work, which is a first step towards training systems for video.
Well, a number of things. So there’s going to be various versions of LLaMA that are improvements of previous LLaMAs, bigger, better, multimodal, things like that. Then in future generations, systems that are capable of planning that really understand how the world works, maybe are trained from video, so they have some world model maybe capable of the type of reasoning and planning I was talking about earlier. How long is that going to take? When is the research that is going in that direction going to feed into the product line if you want of LLaMA? I don’t know. I can’t tell you. There’s a few breakthroughs that we have to basically go through before we can get there, but you’ll be able to monitor our progress because we publish our research. So last week we published the V-JEPA work, which is a first step towards training systems for video.
Then the next step is going to be world models based on this type of idea training from video. There’s similar work at DeepMind also and taking place people, and also at UC Berkeley on world models and video. A lot of people are working on this. I think a lot of good ideas are appearing. My bet is that those systems are going to be JEPA light, they’re not going to be generative models, and we’ll see what the future will tell. There’s really good work, a gentleman called Danijar Hafner who is now DeepMind, who’s worked on models of this type that learn representations and then use them for planning or learning tasks by reinforcement training and a lot of work at Berkeley by Pieter Abbeel, Sergey Levine, a bunch of other people of that type I’m collaborating with actually in the context of some grants with my NYU hat.
Then collaboration is also through Meta ’cause the lab at Berkeley is associated with Meta in some way, so with fair. So I think it is very exciting. I haven’t been that excited about the direction of machine learning and AI since 10 years ago when Fairway was started. Before that, 30 years ago, we were working, oh, sorry, 35 on combination nets and the early days of neural nets. So I’m super excited because I see a path towards potentially human-level intelligence with systems that can understand the world, remember, plan, reason. There is some set of ideas to make progress there that might have a chance of working, and I’m really excited about this. What I like is that somewhat we get on to a good direction and perhaps succeed before my brain turns to a white sauce or before I need to retire.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Yeah. Is it beautiful to you just the amount of GPUs involved, the whole training process on this much compute, just zooming out, just looking at earth and humans together have built these computing devices and are able to train this one brain, then we then open source, like giving birth to this open source brain trained on this gigantic compute system, there’s just the details of how to train on that, how to build the infrastructure and the hardware, the cooling, all of this kind of stuff, or are you just still that most of your excitement is in the theory aspect of it, meaning the software?
Yeah. Yeah. Is it beautiful to you just the amount of GPUs involved, the whole training process on this much compute, just zooming out, just looking at earth and humans together have built these computing devices and are able to train this one brain, then we then open source, like giving birth to this open source brain trained on this gigantic compute system, there’s just the details of how to train on that, how to build the infrastructure and the hardware, the cooling, all of this kind of stuff, or are you just still that most of your excitement is in the theory aspect of it, meaning the software?
Yann LeCun
I used to be a hardware guy many years ago.
I used to be a hardware guy many years ago.
Lex Fridman
Yes. Yes, that’s right.
Yes. Yes, that’s right.
Yann LeCun
Decades ago.
Decades ago.
Lex Fridman
Hardware has improved a little bit. Changed-
Hardware has improved a little bit. Changed-
Yann LeCun
A little bit.
A little bit.
Lex Fridman
… a little bit, yeah.
… a little bit, yeah.
Yann LeCun
Certainly, scale is necessary but not sufficient.
Certainly, scale is necessary but not sufficient.
Lex Fridman
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Yann LeCun
So we certainly need competition. We’re still far in terms of compute power from what we would need to match the compute power of the human brain. This may occur in the next couple of decades, but we’re still some ways away. Certainly, in terms of power efficiency, we’re really far, so there’s a lot of progress to make in hardware. Right now, a lot of the progress is, there’s a bit coming from silicon technology, but a lot of it coming from architectural innovation and quite a bit coming from more efficient ways of implementing the architectures that have become popular, basically combination of transformers and com nets, and so there’s still some ways to go until we are going to saturate. We’re going to have to come up with new principles, new fabrication technology, new basic components perhaps based on different principles and classical digital [inaudible 02:03:41]
So we certainly need competition. We’re still far in terms of compute power from what we would need to match the compute power of the human brain. This may occur in the next couple of decades, but we’re still some ways away. Certainly, in terms of power efficiency, we’re really far, so there’s a lot of progress to make in hardware. Right now, a lot of the progress is, there’s a bit coming from silicon technology, but a lot of it coming from architectural innovation and quite a bit coming from more efficient ways of implementing the architectures that have become popular, basically combination of transformers and com nets, and so there’s still some ways to go until we are going to saturate. We’re going to have to come up with new principles, new fabrication technology, new basic components perhaps based on different principles and classical digital [inaudible 02:03:41]
Lex Fridman
Interesting. So you think in order to build AMI, we potentially might need some hardware innovation too.
Interesting. So you think in order to build AMI, we potentially might need some hardware innovation too.
Yann LeCun
Well, if we want to make it ubiquitous, yeah, certainly, ’cause we’re going to have to reduce the power consumption. A GPU today is half a kilowatt to a kilowatt. Human brain is about 25 watts, and a GPU is way below the power of the human brain. You need something like 100,000 or a million to match it, so we are off by a huge factor here.
Well, if we want to make it ubiquitous, yeah, certainly, ’cause we’re going to have to reduce the power consumption. A GPU today is half a kilowatt to a kilowatt. Human brain is about 25 watts, and a GPU is way below the power of the human brain. You need something like 100,000 or a million to match it, so we are off by a huge factor here.
AGI
Lex Fridman
You often say that a GI is not coming soon, meaning not this year, not the next few years, potentially farther away. What’s your basic intuition behind that?
You often say that a GI is not coming soon, meaning not this year, not the next few years, potentially farther away. What’s your basic intuition behind that?
Yann LeCun
So first of all, it’s not going to be an event. The idea somehow, which is popularized by science fiction and Hollywood, that somehow somebody is going to discover the secret to AGI or human-level AI or AMI, whatever you want to call it, and then turn on a machine and then we have AGI, that’s just not going to happen. It’s not going to be an event. It’s going to be gradual progress. Are we going to have systems that can learn from video how the world works and learn good representations? Yeah. Before we get them to the scale and performance that we observe in humans it’s going to take quite a while. It’s not going to happen in one day. Are we going to get systems that can have large amount of associated memory so they can remember stuff? Yeah, but same, it’s not going to happen tomorrow. There is some basic techniques that need to be developed. We have a lot of them, but to get this to work together with a full system is another story.
So first of all, it’s not going to be an event. The idea somehow, which is popularized by science fiction and Hollywood, that somehow somebody is going to discover the secret to AGI or human-level AI or AMI, whatever you want to call it, and then turn on a machine and then we have AGI, that’s just not going to happen. It’s not going to be an event. It’s going to be gradual progress. Are we going to have systems that can learn from video how the world works and learn good representations? Yeah. Before we get them to the scale and performance that we observe in humans it’s going to take quite a while. It’s not going to happen in one day. Are we going to get systems that can have large amount of associated memory so they can remember stuff? Yeah, but same, it’s not going to happen tomorrow. There is some basic techniques that need to be developed. We have a lot of them, but to get this to work together with a full system is another story.
Are we going to have systems that can reason and plan perhaps along the lines of objective-driven AI architectures that I described before? Yeah, but before we get this to work properly, it’s going to take a while. Before we get all those things to work together, and then on top of this, have systems that can learn hierarchical planning, hierarchical representations, systems that can be configured for a lot of different situation at hand, the way the human brain can, all of this is going to take at least a decade and probably much more because there are a lot of problems that we’re not seeing right now that we have not encountered, so we don’t know if there is an easy solution within this framework. So it’s not just around the corner. I’ve been hearing people for the last 12, 15 years claiming that AGI is just around the corner and being systematically wrong. I knew they were wrong when they were saying it. I called their bullshit.
Lex Fridman
First of all, from the birth of the term artificial intelligence, there has been a eternal optimism that’s perhaps unlike other technologies. Is it a Moravec’s paradox, the explanation for why people are so optimistic about AGI?
First of all, from the birth of the term artificial intelligence, there has been a eternal optimism that’s perhaps unlike other technologies. Is it a Moravec’s paradox, the explanation for why people are so optimistic about AGI?
Yann LeCun
Don’t think it’s just Moravec’s paradox. Moravec’s paradox is a consequence of realizing that the world is not as easy as we think. So first of all, intelligence is not a linear thing that you can measure with a scale or with a single number. Can you say that humans are smarter than orangutans? In some ways, yes, but in some ways, orangutans are smarter than humans in a lot of domains that allows them to survive in the forest, for example.
Don’t think it’s just Moravec’s paradox. Moravec’s paradox is a consequence of realizing that the world is not as easy as we think. So first of all, intelligence is not a linear thing that you can measure with a scale or with a single number. Can you say that humans are smarter than orangutans? In some ways, yes, but in some ways, orangutans are smarter than humans in a lot of domains that allows them to survive in the forest, for example.
Lex Fridman
So IQ is a very limited measure of intelligence. Human intelligence is bigger than what IQ, for example, measures.
So IQ is a very limited measure of intelligence. Human intelligence is bigger than what IQ, for example, measures.
Yann LeCun
Well, IQ can measure approximately something for humans, but because humans come in relatively uniform form, right?
Well, IQ can measure approximately something for humans, but because humans come in relatively uniform form, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yann LeCun
But it only measures one type of ability that maybe relevant for some tasks but not others. But then if you were talking about other intelligent entities for which the basic things that are easy to them is very different, then it doesn’t mean anything. So intelligence is a collection of skills and an ability to acquire new skills efficiently. The collection of skills that a particular intelligent entity possess or is capable of learning quickly is different from the collection of skills of another one. Because it’s a multidimensional thing, the set of skills is a high dimensional space, you can’t measure, you cannot compare two things as to whether one is more intelligent than the other. It’s multidimensional.
But it only measures one type of ability that maybe relevant for some tasks but not others. But then if you were talking about other intelligent entities for which the basic things that are easy to them is very different, then it doesn’t mean anything. So intelligence is a collection of skills and an ability to acquire new skills efficiently. The collection of skills that a particular intelligent entity possess or is capable of learning quickly is different from the collection of skills of another one. Because it’s a multidimensional thing, the set of skills is a high dimensional space, you can’t measure, you cannot compare two things as to whether one is more intelligent than the other. It’s multidimensional.
AI doomers
Lex Fridman
So you push back against what are called AI doomers a lot. Can you explain their perspective and why you think they’re wrong?
So you push back against what are called AI doomers a lot. Can you explain their perspective and why you think they’re wrong?
Yann LeCun
Okay, so AI doomers imagine all kinds of catastrophe scenarios of how AI could escape or control and basically kill us all, and that relies on a whole bunch of assumptions that are mostly false. So the first assumption is that the emergence of super intelligence is going to be an event, that at some point we’re going to figure out the secret and we’ll turn on a machine that is super intelligent, and because we’d never done it before, it’s going to take over the world and kill us all. That is false. It’s not going to be an event. We’re going to have systems that are as smart as a cat, have all the characteristics of human-level intelligence, but their level of intelligence would be like a cat or a parrot maybe or something. Then we’re going to work our way up to make those things more intelligent. As we make them more intelligent, we’re also going to put some guardrails in them and learn how to put some guardrails so they behave properly.
Okay, so AI doomers imagine all kinds of catastrophe scenarios of how AI could escape or control and basically kill us all, and that relies on a whole bunch of assumptions that are mostly false. So the first assumption is that the emergence of super intelligence is going to be an event, that at some point we’re going to figure out the secret and we’ll turn on a machine that is super intelligent, and because we’d never done it before, it’s going to take over the world and kill us all. That is false. It’s not going to be an event. We’re going to have systems that are as smart as a cat, have all the characteristics of human-level intelligence, but their level of intelligence would be like a cat or a parrot maybe or something. Then we’re going to work our way up to make those things more intelligent. As we make them more intelligent, we’re also going to put some guardrails in them and learn how to put some guardrails so they behave properly.
It’s not going to be one effort, that it’s going to be lots of different people doing this, and some of them are going to succeed at making intelligent systems that are controllable and safe and have the right guardrails. If some other goes rogue, then we can use the good ones to go against the rogue ones. So it’s going to be my smart AI police against your rogue AI. So it’s not going to be like we’re going to be exposed to a single rogue AI that’s going to kill us all. That’s just not happening. Now, there is another fallacy, which is the fact that because the system is intelligent, it necessarily wants to take over. There is several arguments that make people scared of this, which I think are completely false as well.
So one of them is in nature, it seems to be that the more intelligent species otherwise end up dominating the other and even distinguishing the others sometimes by design, sometimes just by mistake. So there is thinking by which you say, “Well, if AI systems are more intelligent than us, surely they’re going to eliminate us, if not by design, simply because they don’t care about us,” and that’s just preposterous for a number of reasons. First reason is they’re not going to be a species. They’re not going to be a species that competes with us. They’re not going to have the desire to dominate because the desire to dominate is something that has to be hardwired into an intelligent system. It is hardwired in humans. It is hardwired in baboons, in chimpanzees, in wolves, not in orangutans. The species in which this desire to dominate or submit or attain status in other ways is specific to social species. Non-social species like orangutans don’t have it, and they are as smart as we are, almost, right?
Lex Fridman
To you, there’s not significant incentive for humans to encode that into the AI systems, and to the degree they do, there’ll be other AIs that punish them for it, I’ll compete them over it.
To you, there’s not significant incentive for humans to encode that into the AI systems, and to the degree they do, there’ll be other AIs that punish them for it, I’ll compete them over it.
Yann LeCun
Well, there’s all kinds of incentive to make AI systems submissive to humans.
Well, there’s all kinds of incentive to make AI systems submissive to humans.
Lex Fridman
Right.
Right.
Yann LeCun
Right? This is the way we’re going to build them. So then people say, “Oh, but look at LLMs. LLMs are not controllable,” and they’re right. LLMs are not controllable. But objectively-driven AI, so systems that derive their answers by optimization of an objective means they have to optimize this objective, and that objective can include guardrails. One guardrail is, obey humans. Another guardrail is, don’t obey humans if it’s hurting other humans within limits.
Right? This is the way we’re going to build them. So then people say, “Oh, but look at LLMs. LLMs are not controllable,” and they’re right. LLMs are not controllable. But objectively-driven AI, so systems that derive their answers by optimization of an objective means they have to optimize this objective, and that objective can include guardrails. One guardrail is, obey humans. Another guardrail is, don’t obey humans if it’s hurting other humans within limits.
Lex Fridman
Right. I’ve heard that before somewhere, I don’t remember-
Right. I’ve heard that before somewhere, I don’t remember-
Yann LeCun
Yes, maybe in a book.
Yes, maybe in a book.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, but speaking of that book, could there be unintended consequences also from all of this?
Yeah, but speaking of that book, could there be unintended consequences also from all of this?
Yann LeCun
No, of course. So this is not a simple problem. Designing those guardrails so that the system behaves properly is not going to be a simple issue for which there is a silver bullet for which you have a mathematical proof that the system can be safe. It’s going to be a very progressive, iterative design system where we put those guardrails in such a way that the system behave properly. Sometimes they’re going to do something that was unexpected because the guardrail wasn’t right and we’re dd correct them so that they do it right. The idea somehow that we can’t get it slightly wrong because if we get it slightly wrong, we’ll die is ridiculous. We are just going to go progressively. It is just going to be, the analogy I’ve used many times is turbojet design. How did we figure out how to make turbojet so unbelievably reliable?
No, of course. So this is not a simple problem. Designing those guardrails so that the system behaves properly is not going to be a simple issue for which there is a silver bullet for which you have a mathematical proof that the system can be safe. It’s going to be a very progressive, iterative design system where we put those guardrails in such a way that the system behave properly. Sometimes they’re going to do something that was unexpected because the guardrail wasn’t right and we’re dd correct them so that they do it right. The idea somehow that we can’t get it slightly wrong because if we get it slightly wrong, we’ll die is ridiculous. We are just going to go progressively. It is just going to be, the analogy I’ve used many times is turbojet design. How did we figure out how to make turbojet so unbelievably reliable?
Those are incredibly complex pieces of hardware that run at really high temperatures for 20 hours at a time sometimes, and we can fly halfway around the world on a two-engine jetliner at near the speed of sound. Like how incredible is this? It’s just unbelievable. Did we do this because we invented a general principle of how to make turbojets safe? No, it took decades to fine tune the design of those systems so that they were safe. Is there a separate group within General Electric or Snecma or whatever that is specialized in turbojet safety? No. The design is all about safety, because a better turbojet is also a safer turbojet, so a more reliable one. It’s the same for AI. Do you need specific provisions to make AI safe? No, you need to make better AI systems, and they will be safe because they are designed to be more useful and more controllable.
Lex Fridman
So let’s imagine a system, AI system that’s able to be incredibly convincing and can convince you of anything. I can at least imagine such a system, and I can see such a system be weapon like because it can control people’s minds. We’re pretty gullible. We want to believe a thing, and you can have an AI system that controls it and you could see governments using that as a weapon. So do you think if you imagine such a system, there’s any parallel to something like nuclear weapons?
So let’s imagine a system, AI system that’s able to be incredibly convincing and can convince you of anything. I can at least imagine such a system, and I can see such a system be weapon like because it can control people’s minds. We’re pretty gullible. We want to believe a thing, and you can have an AI system that controls it and you could see governments using that as a weapon. So do you think if you imagine such a system, there’s any parallel to something like nuclear weapons?
Yann LeCun
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
Why is that technology different? So you’re saying there’s going to be gradual development?
Why is that technology different? So you’re saying there’s going to be gradual development?
Yann LeCun
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
It might be-
It might be-
Lex Fridman
Gradual development is going to be, it might be rapid, but there’ll be iterative and then we’ll be able to respond and so on.
Gradual development is going to be, it might be rapid, but there’ll be iterative and then we’ll be able to respond and so on.
Yann LeCun
So that AI system designed by Vladimir Putin or whatever, or his minions is going to be talking to, trying to talk to every American to convince them to vote for-
So that AI system designed by Vladimir Putin or whatever, or his minions is going to be talking to, trying to talk to every American to convince them to vote for-
Lex Fridman
Whoever.
Whoever.
Yann LeCun
… Whoever pleases Putin.
… Whoever pleases Putin.
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
Yann LeCun
Or whatever, or rile people up against each other as they’ve been trying to do. They’re not going to be talking to you, they’re going to be talking to your AI assistant, which is going to be as smart as theirs. Because as I said, in the future, every single one of your interaction with the digital world will be mediated by your AI assistant. So the first thing you’re going to ask, is this a scam? Is this thing telling me the truth? It’s not even going to be able to get to you because it’s only going to talk to your AI system or your AI system. It’s going to be like a spam filter. You’re not even seeing the email, the spam email. It’s automatically put in a folder that you never see. It’s going to be the same thing. That AI system that tries to convince you of something is going to be talking to AI assistant, which is going to be at least as smart as it, and it’s going to say, “This is spam.” It’s not even going to bring it to your attention.
Or whatever, or rile people up against each other as they’ve been trying to do. They’re not going to be talking to you, they’re going to be talking to your AI assistant, which is going to be as smart as theirs. Because as I said, in the future, every single one of your interaction with the digital world will be mediated by your AI assistant. So the first thing you’re going to ask, is this a scam? Is this thing telling me the truth? It’s not even going to be able to get to you because it’s only going to talk to your AI system or your AI system. It’s going to be like a spam filter. You’re not even seeing the email, the spam email. It’s automatically put in a folder that you never see. It’s going to be the same thing. That AI system that tries to convince you of something is going to be talking to AI assistant, which is going to be at least as smart as it, and it’s going to say, “This is spam.” It’s not even going to bring it to your attention.
Lex Fridman
So to you, it’s very difficult for any one AI system to take such a big leap ahead to where it can convince even the other AI systems. There’s always going to be this kind of race where nobody’s way ahead.
So to you, it’s very difficult for any one AI system to take such a big leap ahead to where it can convince even the other AI systems. There’s always going to be this kind of race where nobody’s way ahead.
Yann LeCun
That’s the history of the world. History of the world is whenever there is a progress someplace, there is a countermeasure and it’s a cat and mouse game.
That’s the history of the world. History of the world is whenever there is a progress someplace, there is a countermeasure and it’s a cat and mouse game.
Lex Fridman
Mostly yes, but this is why nuclear weapons are so interesting because that was such a powerful weapon that it mattered who got it first. That you could imagine Hitler, Stalin, Mao getting the weapon first, and that having a different kind of impact on the world than the United States getting the weapon first. But to you, nuclear weapons, you don’t imagine a breakthrough discovery and then Manhattan Project-like effort for AI?
Mostly yes, but this is why nuclear weapons are so interesting because that was such a powerful weapon that it mattered who got it first. That you could imagine Hitler, Stalin, Mao getting the weapon first, and that having a different kind of impact on the world than the United States getting the weapon first. But to you, nuclear weapons, you don’t imagine a breakthrough discovery and then Manhattan Project-like effort for AI?
Yann LeCun
No. No, as I said, it’s not going to be an event. It’s going to be continuous progress. And whenever one breakthrough occurs, it’s going to be widely disseminated really quickly.
No. No, as I said, it’s not going to be an event. It’s going to be continuous progress. And whenever one breakthrough occurs, it’s going to be widely disseminated really quickly.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yann LeCun
Probably first within industry. This is not a domain where government or military organizations are particularly innovative and they’re in fact way behind. And so this is going to come from industry and this kind of information disseminates extremely quickly. We’ve seen this over the last few years where you have a new … Even take AlphaGo, this was reproduced within three months even without particularly detailed information, right?
Probably first within industry. This is not a domain where government or military organizations are particularly innovative and they’re in fact way behind. And so this is going to come from industry and this kind of information disseminates extremely quickly. We’ve seen this over the last few years where you have a new … Even take AlphaGo, this was reproduced within three months even without particularly detailed information, right?
Lex Fridman
Yeah. This is an industry that’s not good at secrecy. But people [inaudible 02:19:22]-
Yeah. This is an industry that’s not good at secrecy. But people [inaudible 02:19:22]-
Yann LeCun
No. But even if there is, just the fact that you know that something is possible makes you realize that it’s worth investing the time to actually do it. You may be the second person to do it, but you’ll do it. And same for all the innovations of self supervision in transformers, decoder only architectures, LLMS. Those things, you don’t need to know exactly the details of how they work to know that it’s possible because it’s deployed and then it’s getting reproduced. And then people who work for those companies move. They go from one company to another and the information disseminates. What makes the success of the US tech industry and Silicon Valley in particular is exactly that, is because the information circulates really, really quickly and disseminates very quickly. And so the whole region is ahead because of that circulation of information.
No. But even if there is, just the fact that you know that something is possible makes you realize that it’s worth investing the time to actually do it. You may be the second person to do it, but you’ll do it. And same for all the innovations of self supervision in transformers, decoder only architectures, LLMS. Those things, you don’t need to know exactly the details of how they work to know that it’s possible because it’s deployed and then it’s getting reproduced. And then people who work for those companies move. They go from one company to another and the information disseminates. What makes the success of the US tech industry and Silicon Valley in particular is exactly that, is because the information circulates really, really quickly and disseminates very quickly. And so the whole region is ahead because of that circulation of information.
Lex Fridman
Maybe just to linger on the psychology of AI doomers, you give, in the classic Yann LeCun way, a pretty good example of just when a new technology comes to be, you say engineer says, “I invented this new thing. I call it a ball pen.” And then the Twitter sphere responds, “OMG people could write horrible things with it, like misinformation, propaganda, hate speech. Ban it now.” Then writing doomers come in, akin to the AI doomers, “Imagine if everyone can get a ball pen. This could destroy society. There should be a law against using ball pen to write hate speech, regulate ball pens now.” And then the pencil industry mogul says, “Yeah, ball pens are very dangerous. Unlike pencil writing, which is erasable, ball pen writing stays forever. Government should require a license for a pen manufacturer.” This does seem to be part of human psychology when it comes up against new technology. What deep insights can you speak to about this?
Maybe just to linger on the psychology of AI doomers, you give, in the classic Yann LeCun way, a pretty good example of just when a new technology comes to be, you say engineer says, “I invented this new thing. I call it a ball pen.” And then the Twitter sphere responds, “OMG people could write horrible things with it, like misinformation, propaganda, hate speech. Ban it now.” Then writing doomers come in, akin to the AI doomers, “Imagine if everyone can get a ball pen. This could destroy society. There should be a law against using ball pen to write hate speech, regulate ball pens now.” And then the pencil industry mogul says, “Yeah, ball pens are very dangerous. Unlike pencil writing, which is erasable, ball pen writing stays forever. Government should require a license for a pen manufacturer.” This does seem to be part of human psychology when it comes up against new technology. What deep insights can you speak to about this?
Yann LeCun
Well, there is a natural fear of new technology and the impact it can have in society. And people have instinctive reaction to the world they know being threatened by major transformations that are either cultural phenomena or technological revolutions. And they fear for their culture, they fear for their job, they fear for the future of their children and their way of life. So any change is feared. And you see this along history, any technological revolution or cultural phenomenon was always accompanied by groups or reaction in the media that basically attributed all the current problems of society to that particular change. Electricity was going to kill everyone at some point. The train was going to be a horrible thing because you can’t breathe past 50 kilometers an hour. And so there’s a wonderful website called the Pessimist Archive.
Well, there is a natural fear of new technology and the impact it can have in society. And people have instinctive reaction to the world they know being threatened by major transformations that are either cultural phenomena or technological revolutions. And they fear for their culture, they fear for their job, they fear for the future of their children and their way of life. So any change is feared. And you see this along history, any technological revolution or cultural phenomenon was always accompanied by groups or reaction in the media that basically attributed all the current problems of society to that particular change. Electricity was going to kill everyone at some point. The train was going to be a horrible thing because you can’t breathe past 50 kilometers an hour. And so there’s a wonderful website called the Pessimist Archive.
Lex Fridman
It’s great.
It’s great.
Yann LeCun
Which has all those newspaper clips of all the horrible things people imagine would arrive because of either a technological innovation or a cultural phenomenon, just wonderful examples of jazz or comic books being blamed for unemployment or young people not wanting to work anymore and things like that. And that has existed for centuries and it’s knee-jerk reactions. The question is do we embrace change or do we resist it? And what are the real dangers as opposed to the imagined ones?
Which has all those newspaper clips of all the horrible things people imagine would arrive because of either a technological innovation or a cultural phenomenon, just wonderful examples of jazz or comic books being blamed for unemployment or young people not wanting to work anymore and things like that. And that has existed for centuries and it’s knee-jerk reactions. The question is do we embrace change or do we resist it? And what are the real dangers as opposed to the imagined ones?
Lex Fridman
So people worry about, I think one thing they worry about with big tech, something we’ve been talking about over and over, but I think worth mentioning again, they worry about how powerful AI will be and they worry about it being in the hands of one centralized power of just a handful of central control. And so that’s the skepticism with big tech you make, these companies can make a huge amount of money and control this technology, and by so doing take advantage, abuse the little guy in society.
So people worry about, I think one thing they worry about with big tech, something we’ve been talking about over and over, but I think worth mentioning again, they worry about how powerful AI will be and they worry about it being in the hands of one centralized power of just a handful of central control. And so that’s the skepticism with big tech you make, these companies can make a huge amount of money and control this technology, and by so doing take advantage, abuse the little guy in society.
Yann LeCun
Well, that’s exactly why we need open source platforms.
Well, that’s exactly why we need open source platforms.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I just wanted to nail the point home more and more.
Yeah, I just wanted to nail the point home more and more.
Yann LeCun
Yes.
Yes.
Joscha Bach
Lex Fridman
So let me ask you on your, like I said, you do get a little bit flavorful on the internet. Joscha Bach tweeted something that you LOL’d at in reference to HAL 9,000. Quote, “I appreciate your argument and I fully understand your frustration, but whether the pod bay doors should be opened or closed is a complex and nuanced issue.” So you’re at the head of Meta AI. This is something that really worries me, that our AI overlords will speak down to us with corporate speak of this nature, and you resist that with your way of being. Is this something you can just comment on, working at a big company, how you can avoid the over fearing, I suppose, through caution create harm?
So let me ask you on your, like I said, you do get a little bit flavorful on the internet. Joscha Bach tweeted something that you LOL’d at in reference to HAL 9,000. Quote, “I appreciate your argument and I fully understand your frustration, but whether the pod bay doors should be opened or closed is a complex and nuanced issue.” So you’re at the head of Meta AI. This is something that really worries me, that our AI overlords will speak down to us with corporate speak of this nature, and you resist that with your way of being. Is this something you can just comment on, working at a big company, how you can avoid the over fearing, I suppose, through caution create harm?
Yann LeCun
Yeah. Again, I think the answer to this is open source platforms and then enabling a widely diverse set of people to build AI assistance that represent the diversity of cultures, opinions, languages, and value systems across the world so that you’re not bound to just be brainwashed by a particular way of thinking because of a single AI entity. So, I think it’s a really, really important question for society. And the problem I’m seeing is that, which is why I’ve been so vocal and sometimes a little sardonic about it-
Yeah. Again, I think the answer to this is open source platforms and then enabling a widely diverse set of people to build AI assistance that represent the diversity of cultures, opinions, languages, and value systems across the world so that you’re not bound to just be brainwashed by a particular way of thinking because of a single AI entity. So, I think it’s a really, really important question for society. And the problem I’m seeing is that, which is why I’ve been so vocal and sometimes a little sardonic about it-
Lex Fridman
Never stop. Never stop, Yann. We love it.
Never stop. Never stop, Yann. We love it.
Yann LeCun
… is because I see the danger of this concentration of power through proprietary AI systems as a much bigger danger than everything else. That if we really want diversity of opinion AI systems, that in the future where we’ll all be interacting through AI systems, we need those to be diverse for the preservation of diversity of ideas and creed and political opinions and whatever, and the preservation of democracy. And what works against this is people who think that for reasons of security, we should keep the AI systems under lock and key because it’s too dangerous to put it in the hands of everybody, because it could be used by terrorists or something. That would lead to potentially a very bad future in which all of our information diet is controlled by a small number of companies through proprietary systems.
… is because I see the danger of this concentration of power through proprietary AI systems as a much bigger danger than everything else. That if we really want diversity of opinion AI systems, that in the future where we’ll all be interacting through AI systems, we need those to be diverse for the preservation of diversity of ideas and creed and political opinions and whatever, and the preservation of democracy. And what works against this is people who think that for reasons of security, we should keep the AI systems under lock and key because it’s too dangerous to put it in the hands of everybody, because it could be used by terrorists or something. That would lead to potentially a very bad future in which all of our information diet is controlled by a small number of companies through proprietary systems.
Lex Fridman
So you trust humans with this technology to build systems that are on the whole good for humanity.
So you trust humans with this technology to build systems that are on the whole good for humanity.
Yann LeCun
Isn’t that what democracy and free speech is all about?
Isn’t that what democracy and free speech is all about?
Lex Fridman
I think so.
I think so.
Yann LeCun
Do you trust institutions to do the right thing?
Do you trust institutions to do the right thing?
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
Yann LeCun
Do you trust people to do the right thing? And yeah, there’s bad people who are going to do bad things, but they’re not going to have superior technology to the good people. So then it’s going to be my good AI against your bad AI, right? There’s the examples that we were just talking about of maybe some rogue country will build some AI system that’s going to try to convince everybody to go into a civil war or something or elect a favorable ruler, but then they will have to go past our AI systems.
Do you trust people to do the right thing? And yeah, there’s bad people who are going to do bad things, but they’re not going to have superior technology to the good people. So then it’s going to be my good AI against your bad AI, right? There’s the examples that we were just talking about of maybe some rogue country will build some AI system that’s going to try to convince everybody to go into a civil war or something or elect a favorable ruler, but then they will have to go past our AI systems.
Lex Fridman
Right. An AI system with a strong Russian accent will be trying to convince our-
Right. An AI system with a strong Russian accent will be trying to convince our-
Yann LeCun
And doesn’t put any articles in their sentences.
And doesn’t put any articles in their sentences.
Humanoid robots
Lex Fridman
Well, it’ll be at the very least, absurdly comedic. Okay. So since we talked about the physical reality, I’d love to ask your vision of the future with robots in this physical reality. So many of the kinds of intelligence that you’ve been speaking about would empower robots to be more effective collaborators with us humans. So since Tesla’s Optimus team has been showing us some progress on humanoid robots, I think it really reinvigorated the whole industry that I think Boston Dynamics has been leading for a very, very long time. So now there’s all kinds of companies Figure AI, obviously Boston Dynamics.
Well, it’ll be at the very least, absurdly comedic. Okay. So since we talked about the physical reality, I’d love to ask your vision of the future with robots in this physical reality. So many of the kinds of intelligence that you’ve been speaking about would empower robots to be more effective collaborators with us humans. So since Tesla’s Optimus team has been showing us some progress on humanoid robots, I think it really reinvigorated the whole industry that I think Boston Dynamics has been leading for a very, very long time. So now there’s all kinds of companies Figure AI, obviously Boston Dynamics.
Yann LeCun
Unitree.
Unitree.
Lex Fridman
Unitree, but there’s a lot of them.
Unitree, but there’s a lot of them.
Yann LeCun
There’s a few of them.
There’s a few of them.
Lex Fridman
It’s great. It’s great. I love it. So do you think there’ll be millions of humanoid robots walking around soon?
It’s great. It’s great. I love it. So do you think there’ll be millions of humanoid robots walking around soon?
Yann LeCun
Not soon, but it’s going to happen. The next decade I think is going to be really interesting in robots, the emergence of the robotics industry has been in the waiting for 10, 20 years without really emerging other than for pre-program behavior and stuff like that. And the main issue is, again, the Moravec paradox, how do we get those systems to understand how the world works and plan actions? And so we can do it for really specialized tasks. And the way Boston Dynamics goes about it is basically with a lot of handcrafted dynamical models and careful planning in advance, which is very classical robotics with a lot of innovation, a little bit of perception, but it’s still not, they can’t build a domestic robot.
Not soon, but it’s going to happen. The next decade I think is going to be really interesting in robots, the emergence of the robotics industry has been in the waiting for 10, 20 years without really emerging other than for pre-program behavior and stuff like that. And the main issue is, again, the Moravec paradox, how do we get those systems to understand how the world works and plan actions? And so we can do it for really specialized tasks. And the way Boston Dynamics goes about it is basically with a lot of handcrafted dynamical models and careful planning in advance, which is very classical robotics with a lot of innovation, a little bit of perception, but it’s still not, they can’t build a domestic robot.
We’re still some distance away from completely autonomous level five driving, and we’re certainly very far away from having level five autonomous driving by a system that can train itself by driving 20 hours like any 17-year-old. So until we have, again, world models, systems that can train themselves to understand how the world works, we’re not going to have significant progress in robotics. So a lot of the people working on robotic hardware at the moment are betting or banking on the fact that AI is going to make sufficient progress towards that,
Lex Fridman
And they’re hoping to discover a product in it too. Because before you have a really strong world model, there’ll be an almost strong world model and people are trying to find a product in a clumsy robot, I suppose, not a perfectly efficient robot. So there’s the factory setting where humanoid robots can help automate some aspects of the factory. I think that’s a crazy difficult task because of all the safety required and all this kind of stuff. I think in the home is more interesting, but then you start to think, I think you mentioned loading the dishwasher, right?
And they’re hoping to discover a product in it too. Because before you have a really strong world model, there’ll be an almost strong world model and people are trying to find a product in a clumsy robot, I suppose, not a perfectly efficient robot. So there’s the factory setting where humanoid robots can help automate some aspects of the factory. I think that’s a crazy difficult task because of all the safety required and all this kind of stuff. I think in the home is more interesting, but then you start to think, I think you mentioned loading the dishwasher, right?
Yann LeCun
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
I suppose that’s one of the main problems you’re working on.
I suppose that’s one of the main problems you’re working on.
Yann LeCun
There’s cleaning up, cleaning the house, clearing up the table after a meal.
There’s cleaning up, cleaning the house, clearing up the table after a meal.
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
Yann LeCun
Washing the dishes, all those tasks, cooking. All the tasks that in principle could be automated but are actually incredibly sophisticated, really complicated.
Washing the dishes, all those tasks, cooking. All the tasks that in principle could be automated but are actually incredibly sophisticated, really complicated.
Lex Fridman
But even just basic navigation around a space full of uncertainty.
But even just basic navigation around a space full of uncertainty.
Yann LeCun
That works. You can do this now, navigation is fine.
That works. You can do this now, navigation is fine.
Lex Fridman
Well, navigation in a way that’s compelling to us humans is a different thing.
Well, navigation in a way that’s compelling to us humans is a different thing.
Yann LeCun
Yeah, it’s not going to be necessarily … We have demos actually, because there is a so-called embodied AI group at fair, and they’ve been not building their own robots, but using commercial robots. And you can tell the robot dog go to the fridge and they can actually open the fridge and they can probably pick up a can in the fridge and stuff like that and bring it to you. So it can navigate, it can grab objects as long as it’s been trained to recognize them, which vision systems work pretty well nowadays, but it’s not like a completely general robot that would be sophisticated enough to do things like clearing up the dinner table.
Yeah, it’s not going to be necessarily … We have demos actually, because there is a so-called embodied AI group at fair, and they’ve been not building their own robots, but using commercial robots. And you can tell the robot dog go to the fridge and they can actually open the fridge and they can probably pick up a can in the fridge and stuff like that and bring it to you. So it can navigate, it can grab objects as long as it’s been trained to recognize them, which vision systems work pretty well nowadays, but it’s not like a completely general robot that would be sophisticated enough to do things like clearing up the dinner table.
Lex Fridman
To me, that’s an exciting future of getting humanoid robots, robots in general in the home more and more, because it gets humans to really directly interact with AI systems in the physical space. And in so doing it allows us to philosophically, psychologically explore our relationships with robots. Going to be really, really, really interesting. So I hope you make progress on the whole JEPA thing soon.
To me, that’s an exciting future of getting humanoid robots, robots in general in the home more and more, because it gets humans to really directly interact with AI systems in the physical space. And in so doing it allows us to philosophically, psychologically explore our relationships with robots. Going to be really, really, really interesting. So I hope you make progress on the whole JEPA thing soon.
Yann LeCun
Well, I hope things can work as planned. Again, we’ve been working on this idea of self supervised running from video for 10 years, and only made significant progress in the last two or three.
Well, I hope things can work as planned. Again, we’ve been working on this idea of self supervised running from video for 10 years, and only made significant progress in the last two or three.
Lex Fridman
And actually you’ve mentioned that there’s a lot of interesting breakage that can happen without having access to a lot of compute. So if you’re interested in doing a PhD in this kind of stuff, there’s a lot of possibilities still to do innovative work. So what advice would you give to an undergrad that’s looking to go to grad school and do a PhD?
And actually you’ve mentioned that there’s a lot of interesting breakage that can happen without having access to a lot of compute. So if you’re interested in doing a PhD in this kind of stuff, there’s a lot of possibilities still to do innovative work. So what advice would you give to an undergrad that’s looking to go to grad school and do a PhD?
Yann LeCun
Basically, I’ve listed them already, this idea of how do you train a world model by observation? And you don’t have to train necessarily on gigantic data sets. It could turn out to be necessary, to actually train on large data sets, to have emergent properties like we have with other lamps. But I think there is a lot of good ideas that can be done without necessarily scaling up than there is how do you do planning with a learn world model? If the world the system evolves in is not the physical world, but is the world of let’s say the internet or some sort of world where an action consists in doing a search in a search engine or interrogating a database or running a simulation or calling a calculator or solving a differential equation, how do you get a system to actually plan a sequence of actions to give the solution to a problem?
Basically, I’ve listed them already, this idea of how do you train a world model by observation? And you don’t have to train necessarily on gigantic data sets. It could turn out to be necessary, to actually train on large data sets, to have emergent properties like we have with other lamps. But I think there is a lot of good ideas that can be done without necessarily scaling up than there is how do you do planning with a learn world model? If the world the system evolves in is not the physical world, but is the world of let’s say the internet or some sort of world where an action consists in doing a search in a search engine or interrogating a database or running a simulation or calling a calculator or solving a differential equation, how do you get a system to actually plan a sequence of actions to give the solution to a problem?
And so the question of planning is not just a question of planning physical actions. It could be planning actions to use tools for a dialogue system or for any kind of intelligence system. And there’s some work on this, but not a huge amount. Some work at fair, one called Toolformer, which was a couple years ago and some more recent work on planning, but I don’t think we have a good solution for any of that. Then there is the question of hierarchical planning. So the example I mentioned of planning a trip from New York to Paris, that’s hierarchical, but almost every action that we take involves hierarchical planning in some sense, and we really have absolutely no idea how to do this.
There’s zero demonstration of hierarchical planning in AI where the various levels of representations that are necessary have been learned. We can do two level hierarchical planning when we designed the two levels. So for example, you have a dog-like robot, you want it to go from the living room to the kitchen. You can plan a path that avoids the obstacle, and then you can send this to a lower level planner that figures out how to move the legs to follow that trajectories. So that works, but that two level planning is designed by hand.
We specify what the proper levels of abstraction, the representation at each level of abstraction have to be. How do you learn this? How do you learn that hierarchical representation of action plans? With [inaudible 02:37:21] and deep learning, we can train the system to learn hierarchical representations of percepts. What is the equivalent when what you’re trying to represent are action plans?
Lex Fridman
For action plans, yeah. So you want basically a robot dog or humanoid robot that turns on and travels from New York to Paris all by itself.
For action plans, yeah. So you want basically a robot dog or humanoid robot that turns on and travels from New York to Paris all by itself.
Yann LeCun
For example.
For example.
Lex Fridman
It might have some trouble at the TSA.
It might have some trouble at the TSA.
Yann LeCun
No, but even doing something fairly simple like a household task, like cooking or something.
No, but even doing something fairly simple like a household task, like cooking or something.
Hope for the future
Lex Fridman
Yeah, there’s a lot involved. It’s a super complex task and once again, we take it for granted. What hope do you have for the future of humanity? We’re talking about so many exciting technologies, so many exciting possibilities. What gives you hope when you look out over the next 10, 20, 50, a hundred years? If you look at social media, there’s wars going on, there’s division, there’s hatred, all this kind of stuff that’s also part of humanity. But amidst all that, what gives you hope?
Yeah, there’s a lot involved. It’s a super complex task and once again, we take it for granted. What hope do you have for the future of humanity? We’re talking about so many exciting technologies, so many exciting possibilities. What gives you hope when you look out over the next 10, 20, 50, a hundred years? If you look at social media, there’s wars going on, there’s division, there’s hatred, all this kind of stuff that’s also part of humanity. But amidst all that, what gives you hope?
Yann LeCun
I love that question. We can make humanity smarter with AI. AI basically will amplify human intelligence. It’s as if every one of us will have a staff of smart AI assistants. They might be smarter than us. They’ll do our bidding, perhaps execute a task in ways that are much better than we could do ourselves, because they’d be smarter than us. And so it’s like everyone would be the boss of a staff of super smart virtual people. So we shouldn’t feel threatened by this any more than we should feel threatened by being the manager of a group of people, some of whom are more intelligent than us. I certainly have a lot of experience with this, of having people working with me who are smarter than me.
I love that question. We can make humanity smarter with AI. AI basically will amplify human intelligence. It’s as if every one of us will have a staff of smart AI assistants. They might be smarter than us. They’ll do our bidding, perhaps execute a task in ways that are much better than we could do ourselves, because they’d be smarter than us. And so it’s like everyone would be the boss of a staff of super smart virtual people. So we shouldn’t feel threatened by this any more than we should feel threatened by being the manager of a group of people, some of whom are more intelligent than us. I certainly have a lot of experience with this, of having people working with me who are smarter than me.
That’s actually a wonderful thing. So having machines that are smarter than us, that assist us in all of our tasks, our daily lives, whether it’s professional or personal, I think would be an absolutely wonderful thing. Because intelligence is the commodity that is most in demand. That’s really what I mean. All the mistakes that humanity makes is because of lack of intelligence really, or lack of knowledge, which is related. So making people smarter, we just can only be better. For the same reason that public education is a good thing and books are a good thing, and the internet is also a good thing, intrinsically and even social networks are a good thing if you run them properly.
It’s difficult, but you can. Because it helps the communication of information and knowledge and the transmission of knowledge. So AI is going to make humanity smarter. And the analogy I’ve been using is the fact that perhaps an equivalent event in the history of humanity to what might be provided by generalization of AI assistant is the invention of the printing press. It made everybody smarter, the fact that people could have access to books. Books were a lot cheaper than they were before, and so a lot more people had an incentive to learn to read, which wasn’t the case before.
And people became smarter. It enabled the enlightenment. There wouldn’t be an enlightenment without the printing press. It enabled philosophy, rationalism, escape from religious doctrine, democracy, science. And certainly without this, there wouldn’t have been the American Revolution or the French Revolution. And so we would still be under a feudal regimes perhaps. And so it completely transformed the world because people became smarter and learned about things. Now, it also created 200 years of essentially religious conflicts in Europe because the first thing that people read was the Bible and realized that perhaps there was a different interpretation of the Bible than what the priests were telling them. And so that created the Protestant movement and created the rift. And in fact, the Catholic Church didn’t like the idea of the printing press, but they had no choice. And so it had some bad effects and some good effects.
I don’t think anyone today would say that the invention of the printing press had a overall negative effect despite the fact that it created 200 years of religious conflicts in Europe. Now, compare this, and I thought I was very proud of myself to come up with this analogy, but realized someone else came with the same idea before me, compare this with what happened in the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman Empire banned the printing press for 200 years, and he didn’t ban it for all languages, only for Arabic. You could actually print books in Latin or Hebrew or whatever in the Ottoman Empire, just not in Arabic.
And I thought it was because the rulers just wanted to preserve the control over the population and the religious dogma and everything. But after talking with the UAE Minister of AI, Omar Al Olama, he told me no, there was another reason. And the other reason was that it was to preserve the corporation of calligraphers. There’s an art form, which is writing those beautiful Arabic poems or whatever, religious text in this thing. And it was a very powerful corporation of scribes basically that run a big chunk of the empire, and we couldn’t put them out of business. So they banned the printing press in part to protect that business.
Now, what’s the analogy for AI today? Who are we protecting by banning AI? Who are the people who are asking that AI be regulated to protect their jobs? And of course, it’s a real question of what is going to be the effect of a technological transformation like AI on the job market and the labor market? And there are economists who are much more expert at this than I am, but when I talk to them, they tell us we’re not going to run out of the job. This is not going to cause mass unemployment. This is just going to be gradual shift of different professions.
The professions that are going to be hot 10 or 15 years from now, we have no idea today what they’re going to be. The same way, if you go back 20 years in the past, who could have thought 20 years ago that the hottest job, even five, 10 years ago, was mobile app developer? Smartphones weren’t invented.
Lex Fridman
Most of the jobs of the future might be in the Metaverse.
Most of the jobs of the future might be in the Metaverse.
Yann LeCun
Well, it could be, yeah.
Well, it could be, yeah.
Lex Fridman
But the point is you can’t possibly predict. But you’re right. You made a lot of strong points. And I believe that people are fundamentally good. And so if AI, especially open source AI, can make them smarter, it just empowers the goodness in humans.
But the point is you can’t possibly predict. But you’re right. You made a lot of strong points. And I believe that people are fundamentally good. And so if AI, especially open source AI, can make them smarter, it just empowers the goodness in humans.
Yann LeCun
So I share that feeling, I think people are fundamentally good. And in fact, a lot of doomers are doomers because they don’t think that people are fundamentally good, and they either don’t trust people or they don’t trust the institution to do the right thing so that people behave properly.
So I share that feeling, I think people are fundamentally good. And in fact, a lot of doomers are doomers because they don’t think that people are fundamentally good, and they either don’t trust people or they don’t trust the institution to do the right thing so that people behave properly.
Lex Fridman
Well, I think both you and I believe in humanity, and I think I speak for a lot of people in saying thank you for pushing the open source movement, pushing to making both research and AI open source, making it available to people, and also the models themselves, making it open source. So thank you for that. And thank you for speaking your mind in such colorful and beautiful ways on the internet. I hope you never stop. You’re one of the most fun people I know and get to be a fan of. So Yann, thank you for speaking to me once again, and thank you for being you.
Well, I think both you and I believe in humanity, and I think I speak for a lot of people in saying thank you for pushing the open source movement, pushing to making both research and AI open source, making it available to people, and also the models themselves, making it open source. So thank you for that. And thank you for speaking your mind in such colorful and beautiful ways on the internet. I hope you never stop. You’re one of the most fun people I know and get to be a fan of. So Yann, thank you for speaking to me once again, and thank you for being you.
Yann LeCun
Thank you, Lex.
Thank you, Lex.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Yann LeCun. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Arthur C. Clarke. The only way to discover the limits of the possible is to go beyond them, into the impossible. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Yann LeCun. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Arthur C. Clarke. The only way to discover the limits of the possible is to go beyond them, into the impossible. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Serhii Plokhy: History of Ukraine, Russia, Soviet Union, KGB, Nazis & War | Lex Fridman Podcast #415
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #415 with Serhii Plokhy.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Serhii Plokhy. What are the major explanations for the collapse of the Soviet Union? Maybe ones you agree with and ones you disagree with.
All of this processes were interrelated, interconnected, but when people provide ideology as the explanation for all of these processes, that’s where I disagree, because ideological collapse happened on the territory of the Soviet Union in general. The Soviet Union lost the Cold War, whether we’re talking about Moscow, Leningrad, or St. Petersburg now, or Vladivostok. But the fall of the Soviet Union is about a story in which Vladivostok and St. Petersburg ended up in one country, and Kyiv, Minsk and Dushanbe ended in different countries.
The theories and explanations about how did that happen, for me, this really very helpful theories for understanding the Soviet collapse. So the mobilization from below the collapse of the center, against the background of economic collapse, against the background of ideological implosion, that’s how I look at the fall of the Soviet Union and that’s how I look at the theories that explain that collapse.
We talked about the Soviet Union, and now talk about Russia, as possessing plus-minus 1/6th of the surface of the Earth. You don’t get in possession of 1/6th of the earth by being a nation state. You get that sort of size as an empire. And the Soviet collapse is continuation of the disintegration of the Russian Empire that started back in 1917, that was arrested for some period of time by the Bolsheviks, by the Communist ideology, which was internationalist ideology. And then came back in full force in the late ’80s and early ’90s.
So the most important story for me, this is the story of the continuing collapse of the Russian Empire and the rise of not just local nationalism, but also rise of Russian nationalism that turned out to be as a destructive force for the imperial or multi-ethnic, multinational state, as was Ukrainian nationalism or Georgian or Estonian for that matter.
The Soviet collapse was a huge headache for the administration in the White House for a number of reasons. They liked to work with Gorbachev. The Soviet Union was emerging as a junior partner of the United States on the international arena. Collapse was destroying all of that. And on the top of that, there was a question of the nuclear weapons, unaccounted nuclear weapons. So the United States was doing everything humanly possible to keep the Soviet Union together in one piece until really late November of 1991, when it became clear that it was a lost cause and they had to say goodbye to Gorbachev and to the project that he introduced.
A few months later, or a year later, there was a presidential campaign and Bush was running for the second term and was looking for achievements. And there were many achievements. I basically treat him with great respect, but destruction of the Soviet Union was not one of those achievements. He was on the other side of that divide. But the politics, the political campaign, of course, have their own rules. And they produce, give birth to mythology, which we still, at least in this country, we live until now, until today.
What I think would happen one way or another is the Soviet collapse in a different form, on somebody else’s watch at some later period in time. Because we’re dealing with not just processes that we’re happening in the Soviet Union, we’re dealing with global processes. And the 20th century turned out to be the century of the disintegration of the empires.
You look at the globe, at the map of the world in 1914, and you compare it to the map at the end of the 20th century in 1991, 1992, and suddenly you realize that there are many candidates for being the most important event, the most important process in the 20th century. But the biggest global thing that happened was redrawing the map of the world and producing dozens, if not hundreds, of new states. That’s the outcome of the different processes of the 20th century. Look, Yugoslavia is falling apart around the same time. Czechoslovakia goes through what can be called a civilized divorce, a very, very rare occurrence in the fall of multinational states.
So yeah, the writing was on the wall, whether it would happen under Gorbachev or later, whether it would happen as the result of reforms, or as the result of no reforms. But I think that sooner later that would happen.
And then came 1991. And what we see even with today’s Russia, is it’s a very different sort of policies. The Russia or Russian leadership tried to learn a lesson from 1991, so there is no national republics in the Russian Federation that would have more rights than the Russian administrative units. The structure is different, the nationality policies are different, the level of Russification is much higher. So it is in many ways already a post-imperial formation.
Ukrainian referendum is the answer, but Ukrainians didn’t answer their referendum question of whether they want the Soviet Union to be dissolved or not. They answered very limited in terms of … It’s been a question whether you support the decision of [foreign language 00:13:06], your parliament, for Ukraine to go independent. And the rest was not on the ballot. So why then, one week later, the Soviet Union is gone? And President Yeltsin explained to President Bush around that time the reason why Ukraine was so important. He said that, “Well, if Ukraine is gone, Russia is not interested in this Soviet project because Russia would be outnumbered and outvoted by the Muslim republics.” So there was a cultural element.
But there was also another one. Ukraine happened to be the second-largest Soviet republic in then post-Soviet state, in terms of population, in terms of the economy, economic potential, and so on and so forth. And as Yeltsin suggested close culturally, linguistically and otherwise to Russia. So with the second-largest republic gone, Russia didn’t think that it was in Russia’s interest to continue with the Soviet Union. And around that time Yegor Gaidar, who was the chief economic advisor of Yeltsin, was telling him, “Well, we just don’t have money anymore to support other republics. We have to focus on Russia. We have to use oil and gas money within the Russian Federation.” So the state was bankrupt. Imperial projects, at least in the context of the late 20th century, they costed money. It wasn’t a money-making machine as it was back in the 18th and 19th century. And the combination of all this factors led to the processes in which Ukraine’s decision to go independent spelled the end to the Soviet Union. And if today anybody wants to restore, not the Soviet Union, but some form of Russian control over the post-Soviet space, Ukraine is as important today as it was back in December of 1991.
My explanation at least is that the World War II, the price was enormous, but the Soviet Union emerged as a great victor and captured half of Europe. 1991, in terms of the lives lost at that point, the price was actually very, very low. But for Putin, what was important that the state was lost, and he in particular was concerned about the division of the Russian people, which he understood back then like he understands now in very, very broad terms.
So for him, the biggest tragedy is not the loss of life, the biggest tragedy is the loss of the great power status or the unity of those whom he considered to be Russian nations. So at least this is my reading, this is my understanding of what is there, what is on the paper, and what is between the lines.
And from what we can understand today, and that can of course change tomorrow with all these breakthroughs in sciences, is that the Slavs came into existence somewhere in the area of Pripyat Marshes, the northwestern part of Ukraine, southwestern part of Belarus, eastern part of Poland. And that is considered to be historical homeland of Slavs. And then they spread, and they spread all the way to the Adriatic. So we have Kurds, we have Russians spreading all the way to the Pacific. We have Ukrainians, we have Belarusians, Poles. Once we had Czechoslovaks, now we have Czechs and Slovaks. That’s the story of starting with the 8th and 9th century, even a little bit early, we can already follow that story with the help of the written sources, mostly from Byzantine, then later from Western Europe.
But what I was trying to do, not being a scientist, not being an expert in linguistics, or not being an expert in DNA analysis, I was trying to see what was happening in the minds of those peoples, and their elites in particular. Whom we call today not Slavs, but Eastern Slavs, which means Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians. How they imagined themselves, how they imagined their world. And eventually I look at the so-called nation-building projects.
So trying to answer the question of how we arrived to the situation in which we are today, where there are not just three East Slavic nations, but there are also three East Slavic states, Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian. This is the focus of my book. And admittedly, in that particular book, I end on the 18th century before the era of nationalism. But then there are other books like Lost Kingdom, where I bring the story all the way up to today.
The legal code that was created at that time existed for a long period of time. The acceptance of Christianity from Byzantium, that became a big issue that separated then Eastern Slavs from their Western neighbors, including Czechs and Poles, but united in that way to, let’s say, Bulgarians or Serbs. And the beginning of the written literature, beginning in Kyiv. So all of that is considered to be part of heritage, all of that is being contested. And this debates that were academic for a long period of time, what we see now tragically are being continued on the battlefield.
The idea was to get whatever goods you can get in that part of Eastern Europe, and most of those goods were slaves, local population. Put them on the ships in Kyiv, because Kyiv was on the border with the steppe zones. Steppe zones were controlled by other groups, Scythians, Sarmations, Polovtsians, Pechenegs, and so on, and you name it. And then staying on the river, being protected from attacks of the nomads to come to the Black Sea and sell these products in Constantinople. That was the idea, that was the model.
Vikings tried to practice that sort of business model also in other parts of Europe, and like in other parts of Europe, they turned out to be by default creators of new politics, of new states. And that was the story of the first Kievan dynasty, and Kyiv as the capital of that huge empire that was going from the Baltics to today, central Ukraine, and then was trying to get through the southern Ukraine to the Black Sea, that was a major, major European state kingdom, if you want to call it, of medieval Europe. Creating a lot of tradition in terms of dynasty, in terms of language, in terms of religion, in terms of, again, historical mythology. So Kyiv is central for the nation-building myth of a number of groups in the region.
And Moscow comes to prominence really in a very different context and with a very different empire running the show in the region. The story of Moscow and the rise of Moscow, this is the story of the Mongol rule over former Rus lands and former Rus territories. The part of the former Rus eventually overthrows the Mongol control with the help of the small group of people called Lithuanians, which had a young state and young dynasty, and united this lands, which were mostly in today’s terms Ukrainian and Belorussian. So they separate early. And what is today’s Russia, mostly western Russia, central Russia, stays under the Mongol control up until late 15th century.
And that was the story when Moscow rises as the new capital of that realm, replacing the city of Vladimir as that capital. For those who ever went to Russia, they familiar with, of course, Vladimir as the place of the oldest architectural monuments, the so-called the Golden Ring of Russia, and so on and so forth. Vladimir is central, and there were so many architectural monuments there because before there was Moscow, there was Vladimir. Eventually in this struggle over control of the territory, struggle for favors from the Mongols and the Tatar Horde, Moscow emerges as the center of that particular realm under Mongols.
After the Mongol rule is removed, Moscow embarks on the project that historians, Russian historians of the 19th century, called the “gathering of the Russian lands.” Using Russian now for Rus and trying to bring back the lands of former Kievan Rus, but also the lands of the former Mongol Empire. The Russians get to the Pacific before they get to Kyiv historically, and really the, quote, unquote, “gathering of the,” quote, unquote, “Russian lands.” As only in 1945, when the Soviet Union bullies the Czechoslovak government into turning what is today’s Transcarpathian Ukraine to the Soviet Union. It is included in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.
So that’s the moment when that destiny, the way how it was imagined by the 19th century Russian historian, was eventually fulfilled. Moscow was in control of all these lands.
So there is this linguistic history that is in common, but languages very clearly indicate that you’re dealing with different peoples. We know that language is not everything. Americans speak a particular way of English, Australians speak a particular variant of English. But for reasons of geography, history, we pretty much believe that despite linguistic unity, these are different nations and different peoples. And there are some parts of political tradition more in common, others are quite different.
So the same when it comes to language, the same when it comes to political tradition, to the loyalty to the political institution, applies to Slavic nations. Again, there is nothing particularly unique about the Slavs in that regard.
And the text captivates the attention of some key figures in the Russian intellectual elite in St. Petersburg, people like Kondraty Ryleyev, who was executed for his participation in 1825 uprising. Writes poetry on the basis of this text. Pushkin pays attention to it as well. And then comes along the key figure in Ukrainian national revival, of the 19th century Ukrainian national project, Taras Shevchenko, and reads it as well, and they all read it very differently. Eventually, by the beginning of the mid 20th century, some of the Russian, mostly nationalist writers, call this text the Quran of Ukrainian nationalism.
So what is there? The story, it’s very important in a sense that what the authors, and that’s what I claim in the book, what the authors of the text were trying to say, they were trying to say that the Cossack elite should have the same rights as the Russian nobility. And brings the long historical records to prove how cold the Cossacks were over the period of time.
But at the beginning of the 19th century, they put this claim already, they use new arguments, and these arguments are about nation and nationalism. And they’re saying that the Cossacks are a separate nation, and that’s a big, big, big claim. The Russian Empire, and this is a very, very good argument in historiography, that Russian Empire grew and acquired this 1/6th of the Earth by using one very specific way of integrating those lands. It integrated the elites. It was making deals with the elites. Whether their elites were Muslim or their elites were Roman Catholic, as the case with the Poles, they would be-
So, the importance of the tax is that it was making claim on the part of a particular estate, the Cossack Officer Class, which was that empire could survive. But it turned it, given the conditions of the time, into the claim for the special role of Cossacks as a nation, creating that this is a separate nation, Russian nation. And that is the challenge of nationalism that no empire really survived, and the Russian Empire was not an exception. So, there’s a turning point when the discourse switches from loyalty based on the integration of the elites to the loyalty based on attachment to your nation, to your language, and to your culture, and to your history.
So, Bandera becomes the leader of the organization of Ukrainian Nationalists in Ukraine at the young age and organizes a number of assassinations of the Polish officials or members of the Ukrainian community who this young people, in their 17, 18, 19, considered to be collaborators. He is arrested, put on trial, and that’s where the myth of Bandera starts to emerge, because he uses the trial to make statements about the Ukrainian nationalism, radical nationalism, and its goals, and suddenly, becomes a hero among the Ukrainian youth at that time. He is sentenced for execution for death. So, when he delivers his speech, he knows that he probably would die soon, and then it was, the sentence was commuted to life in prison.
Then World War II happens. The Polish state collapses under the pressure coming, of course, from Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. Bandera walks away and presides over the act of the split of the organization of Ukrainian Nationalists into two groups. The most radical one used called Revolutionary, they call themselves Revolutionary, is led by Bandera. They worked together with the Nazi Germany at that time, with the hope that Nazi Germany would deliver them independent Ukraine.
First days of the German attack, Nazi attack on the Soviet Union, the units formed on the basis of Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists marching to the city of Lviv and declare Ukrainian independence. That was not sanctioned by the German authorities. That was not in German plans. So, they arrest Bandera, members of his family, his brothers, members of the leaders, leaders of the organization. So, his two brothers go to Auschwitz, die there. He was sent to Sachsenhausen for the most duration of the war, until 1944, refusing to revoke declaration of Ukrainian independence, which, again, contributes further to his mythology.
After the war, he never comes back to Ukraine. He lives in exile in Munich. So, between 1930 and his death in 1959, he spent in Ukraine maybe up to two years, maybe a little bit more, but most of the time was either in the Polish prison, or in the German concentration camp, or in exile.
But the myth of Bandera lived. And all the members of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and then the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, that fought against the Soviets all the way into the early 1950s, they were called Banderites. They were called Banderites by the Soviet authorities. They were known also in that way to the local population. So, there was a faraway leader that barely was there on the spot, but whose name was attached to this movement for, really, liberation of Ukraine at that time. Again, the battle that failed.
But there are other parts of his life which certainly put this whole thing in question. The fate of his family, his own time in the German concentration camp, certainly don’t fit the propaganda one-sided image of Bandera.
In terms of him being a hero, that’s a very, very interesting question, because he is perceived in Ukraine today, not by all, and probably not by the majority, but by many people in Ukraine, as a symbol of fighting against the Soviet Union and, by extension, against Russia and Russian occupation. So, his popularity grew after February 24, 2022 as a symbol of that resistance. Again, we are talking here about myth and mythology, because Bandera was not leading the fight against the Soviet occupation in Ukraine because, at that time, he was just simply not in Ukraine. He was in Germany. And you can imagine that geography mattered at that time much more than it matters today.
In terms of fascism, there is very clear and there is research done that, in particularly, Italian fascism had influence on the thinking of people in that organization, including people at the top. But it is also very important to keep in mind that they call themselves nationalist and revolutionaries. And despite the fact that in 1939 and 1940 and 1941, it was very beneficial for them to declare themselves to be Ukrainian fascists and establish this bond, not just with Italy, but with Nazi Germany. They refused to do that. And then, they used to recall their independence. So, influences, yes, but clearly, it’s a different type of political project.
Why Ukraine in the conditions of the war is the country that manages relations between different ethnic groups and languages in the way that strengthens political nation? So, for me, as a scholar and a researcher, what I see is that, in Ukraine, the influence of the far right in different variations is much lower than it is among some of Ukraine’s neighbors and in Europe in general. And the question is why. I don’t know. I have guesses. I don’t know answer. But that’s the question that I think is interesting to answer, how Ukraine ended up to be the only country in the world, outside of Israel, who has a Jewish president who is, my at least understanding, is the most popular president in history, in terms of how his popularity goes after the election. So, this really, from my point of view, interesting questions, and again, we can certainly debate that.
And yes, the war, historically, of course, puts forward and makes, from the more nationalist views and forces, turned them from marginal forces into more central ones. We talked about Bandera and we talked about Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists. They were the most marginal group in the political spectrum in Ukraine in the 1930s that one can only imagine. But World War II comes, and they become the most central group, because they also were, from the start go, they had the organization, the violence was basically one of their means, they knew how to fight. So, historically, wars indeed produced those results, so we are looking at Ukraine. We’re trying to see what is happening there.
And as war started first in 2014, and then all out war in 2022, I came across a lot of people on the personal level, but also in the media reporting, that they really can’t find common language with their close relatives in Russia, people who visited Ukraine who know that it’s not taken over by nationalists and is not taken over by Nazis, but the media around them, the neighbors around them, the people at their work, basically, say one and the same thing. And we, as humans, in general, whatever our background, we are very, very, our mind is really, it’s relatively easy to manipulate it, and to a degree that even family connections and even family ties don’t sometimes help to maintain that ability to think and to analyze on your own to look at the facts.
One of the explanations was that they were looking at the experience of World War I, and seeing that the units, the Ukrainian units, in the Austrian army then played a very important role in the fight for independence. So that is one of the explanations. You can’t just use one explanation to describe motivations of everyone and every single person who was joined in there. So, they were sent to the front. They were defeated within a few short days by the Red Army, and then were retreating through Slovakia, where they were used to fight with the partisan movement there, and eventually surrendered to the British. So, that’s the story. You can personally maybe understand what the good motivations were of this person or that person, but that is one of the best, one of the very tragic and unfortunate pages in Ukrainian history. You can’t justify that as a phenomenon.
So, from that point of view, the celebration of that experience, as opposed to looking at that, okay, that happened, and we wish that those young men who were idealistic or joined the Division for idealistic purposes had better understanding of things or made other choices, but you can’t certainly celebrate that. And once that happened, that, of course, became a big propaganda, a propaganda item, in the current war. We’re talking about 10,000-20,000 people in the Division, and we’re talking about 2-3 million Ukrainians fighting in the Red Army. And again, it’s not like Red Army is completely blameless in the way how it behaved in Prussia, in Germany, and so on and so forth. But it’s basically, it’s, again, we’re going back to the story of Bandera. So, there is a period of collaboration, and that’s what propaganda tries to define him by, or there is a Division Galizien by 20,000 people, and somehow it makes irrelevant the experience of 2-3 million people.
So, that could be an opportunity to explore the dark complexity that some of the Ukrainians were in the SS, or Bandera, the complexities there, but I think they were doing not a complex thing. They were doing a very shallow applaud. And we should applaud veterans, of course, but in that case, they were doing it for show, for Zelenskyy and so on. So, we should clarify that the applause wasn’t knowing, it wasn’t for the SS. It was for Ukrainian, it was for World War II veterans, but the propaganda, or at least an interpretation from the Russian side, from whatever side, is that they were applauding the full person standing before them, which wasn’t just a Ukrainian veteran, but Ukrainian veteran that fought for the SS.
The war is conducted by the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, which have a Ukrainian insurgent army, and the government tries to crush that resistance. So, what it does is basically recruits local people to spy on the partisans on the underground, and Bohdan Stashynsky is one of those people. His family is supporting the resistance. They provide food. His sister is engaged with one of the local commanders of this underground unit, and they know everything about Stashynsky’s family and they know everything about him because he is also collecting funds for the underground. They have a conversation with him saying that, “Okay, that’s what we got, and you and your family can go to prison, or you help us a little bit. We’re interested in the fiance of your sister, and we want to get him.” Stashynsky says yes. Once they round up the fiance, he basically betrayed a member or almost member of his family, he is done. He can’t go back to his village, he can’t go back to his study. He was studying in [inaudible 01:09:39] at that time. As I write in my book, the secret police becomes his family.
And he is sent to Kyiv. He is trained for two years, sent to East Germany, into Berlin and becomes an assassin. So, they sent him across the border to Western Germany, to Munich. It was the headquarter of different organizations, anti-Soviet organizations, Ukrainian and Russian and Georgian and so on and so forth. And he kills two leaders of the organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, one editor of the newspaper, and eventually he kills Bandera. He does that with the new weapon, a spray pistol, that eventually makes it into the bond novel, The Man with the Golden Gun. And that whole episode is a little bit reshaped, but it’s not in the film, but it is in the novel itself.
And then later has a change of mind under the influence of his German fiance and then wife. They decide to escape to the West. And while they’re doing that, they discover that their apartment was bugged and probably the KGB knows all of that. A long story short, his son dies in Berlin. KGB doesn’t allow him to go there, but his wife has a nervous breakdown so they allow him to go there to just calm her so that there would be no scandal. And two of them, one day before their son’s burial, because after that they would be sent to Moscow. They jumped the ship and go to West Berlin, two hours before the Berlin Wall was being built.
So, if they would stay for the funeral, probably the KGB would not let them go. But also if they would stay, the border would be there. And he goes to the American intelligence and says, “Okay, that’s who I am and that’s what I did.” And they look at him and they say, “We don’t trust you. We don’t know who you are. You have documents in five names. You say you killed Bandera. Well, we have a different information. He was poisoned and probably by someone in his close circle. A spray pistol, did you read too much Ian Fleming? Where does this come from?”
He insists, they said, “Okay, you insist. If you committed all those crimes, they giving you to the German police, and German police will be investigating you.” And then the trial comes, and if he says, if he takes back his testimony, the whole case against him collapses. He can go free. He knows that if he goes free, he is a target of his colleagues from the same department. So, his task at the trial is to prove that he’s guilty, that he did that.
And then he disappears and nobody knows where he goes. And there are all sorts of cover stories. And I was lucky to interview a commander, former chief of the South African Police, who confirmed to me that Stashynsky was in South Africa.
It changed in the ’70s with Andropov where KGB started to play, again, very important role in the Soviet history. And let’s say decisions on Afghanistan and the Soviet troops marching into Afghanistan were made by the, apart from Brezhnev, by the trio of the people who would be called today [foreign language 01:16:15] maybe or not all of them were [foreign language 01:16:17] but one of course was Andropov, the head of the KGB. Another was the Minister of Defense, and then there was secretary in charge of the military industrial complex, Ministry of Foreign Minister of Foreign Affairs.
But the head of the KGB became really not just the member of Politbruo, but the member of that inner circle. And then the fact that on Andropov succeeds Brezhnev is also a manifestation of the power that KGB acquired really after Khrushchev in the 1970s, and then going into the 1980s.
So, really institutionally it was a huge, huge mammoth. And another thing that we know we can sort of extrapolate from what we know from the Stasi archives, that the surveillance at home, the surveillance was really massive. The guess is the Soviets were not as effective and as meticulous and as scrupulous and as methodical as probably as Germans were. But that gives you a basic idea of how penetrated the entire society was.
After this scandal with Stashynsky, at least on many levels, the KGB stopped the practice of the assassinations, political assassinations abroad because it was considered politically to be extremely, extremely dangerous. The person who was in charge of the KGB at the time of Bandera assassination, Shelepin, was one of the candidates to replace Khrushchev and Brezhnev used against him that scandal abroad eventually to remove him from Politburo.
So, the KGB was really looking at the party leadership as to a degree, an effective corrupt and who was on their way. And from what I understand, that’s exactly the attitudes that people like Putin and people of his circle brought to power in Kremlin. So, the methods that KGB use they can use now, and there is no party or no other institution actually stopping them from doing that. And they think about, my understanding, the operations abroad about foreign policy in general in terms of the KGB mindset of planning operations and executing particular operations and so on and so forth. I think a lot of culture that came into existence in the Soviet KGB now became part of the culture of the Russian establishment.
And that’s how things started. But then when they became really massive and why something that was called Euro Revolution became Revolution of Dignity was when the government police beat up students in downtown Kyiv, who judging by the reports were basically already almost ready to disperse, almost ready to go home. And that’s when roughly half of Kyiv showed up on the streets. That sort of the police behavior, that sort of was absolutely unacceptable in Ukraine. The stealing elections and falsification of elections wasn’t unacceptable.
That’s where around that time and around 2004, the president of Ukraine at that time, Leonid Kuchma, writes a book called Ukraine is Not Russia. And apparently the term comes from his discussion with Putin, when Putin was suggesting to him quite strongly to use force against people [inaudible 01:26:11] on the square in Kyiv. And Kuchma allegedly said to him, “You don’t understand. Ukraine is not Russia. You can’t do things like that. You get pushed back.” And that’s, this two events, 2004 and then 2013 became really crucial point in terms of the Ukraine direction, the survival of Ukrainian democracy, which is one of very few countries in the post Soviet space where democracy survived the original flirt between the government leaders and democracy of the 1990s.
It was the old Soviet story in Russia. Everywhere else there was high democratic expectations, but they came pretty much to an end by the end of the decade. Ukraine preserved the democracy and the orientation of Ukraine toward integration in some form into Western and European structures, that Ukrainian democracy plus Western orientation was something. And in Russia, we see the strengthening of the autocratic regime under Putin, that if you look deeper, this are the processes that put the two countries on the collision course.
The Ukraine signing association agreement with European Union would mean that Ukraine would not be able to sign association agreement with any Eurasian union in any shape or form, that was at that time in the process of making. And for Vladimir Putin, that was the beginning of his, or part of his third term, one of his agenda items for the third term was really consolidation of the post-Soviet space and Eurasian space and not membership in NATO, not membership in European Union. But association agreement with European Union meant that that post-Soviet space would have to exist under Moscow’s control, but without Ukraine, the second-largest post-Soviet republic. The republic on whose vote depended the continuing existence of the Soviet Union and whose vote ended in many ways the existence of the Soviet Union.
So, that is broadly background, but also there are of course personalities. There are also their beliefs, their readings of history, and all of that became part of the story. But if you look at that geopolitically, the association agreement is put in Ukraine outside of the Russian sphere of influence. And the response was an attempt to topple the government in Kyiv that clearly was going to sign that agreement, to take over Crimea and to help to deal with a lot of issues within Russia itself and boost the popularity of the president.
And it certainly, certainly worked in that way as well. Once Ukraine, still after Crimea, continued on its path, then the next step started the so-called hybrid warfare in Donbas. But again, unlike Crimea, from what I understand, Russia was not really looking forward to taking possession of Donbas. Donbas was viewed as the way how to influence Ukraine to stop it from a drift toward the West.
But Donbas became a site, one of the key sites in the Russian Empire of early industrialization, with its mining industry, with mythological industry. So, what that meant was that people from other parts of, not Ukraine, but other parts of the Russian Empire, congregated there. That’s where jobs were. That’s how Khrushchev and his family came to Donbas. The family of Brezhnev overshoot a little bit. They got to the industrial enterprises in the city of [inaudible 01:33:13] the place, the city that was called [inaudible 01:33:16].
So, those were Russian peasants moving into the area in looking for their job. The population became quite mixed. Ukrainians still constituted the majority of the population, but not necessarily in the towns and in the cities. And culturally, the place was becoming more and more Russian as the result of that moment. Apart from the Crimea, Donbas was the part of Ukraine where the ethnic Russians were the biggest group. They were not the majority, but they were very, very big and significant group. For example, in the city of Mariupol, that was all but destroyed in the course of the last two years, the ethnic Russians constituted over 40% of the population, right? So, that’s not exactly part of Donbas, but that gives you general idea.
Now, the story of Donbas and what happened now is multidimensional, and this ethnic composition is just one part of the story. Another very important part of the story is economy, and Donbas is a classical rust belt. And we know what happens with the cities that were part of the first or second wave of industrialization in the United States and globally, we know about social problems that exist in those places. So, Donbas is probably the most dramatic and tragic case of implosion of the rust belt. With the mines not anymore producing the sort of the… And at the acceptable price. The coal that they used to produce, is people losing jobs with the politicians looking for subsidies as opposed to trying very unpopular, unpopular measures of doing something and bring your money and your investment into the region. All of that become part of the story that made it easy for Russia, for the Russian Federation, to destabilize the situation. We have interviews with Mr. Girkin who is saying that he was the first who pulled the trigger and fired the shot in that war. He became the Minister of Defense in the Donetsk people’s republic. You look at the Prime Minister, he is another person with Moscow residency permit. So, you see key figures in those positions at the start and the beginning, not being Russians from Ukraine, but being Russians from Russia and Russians from Moscow closely connected to the government structure and intelligence structure and so on. So, that is the start in the beginning, but the way how it exploded, the way it did was also a combination of the economic and ethno-cultural and linguistic factors.
And the people who spoke Ukrainian are more on the western side of Ukraine and young people that are kind of wanting to show that in an activist way that they want to fight for the independence of their country. So, I take your point. I wonder if you want to comment about language and maybe about the future of language in Ukraine. Is the future of language going to stabilize on Ukrainian or is it going to return to its traditional base of Russian language?
And in Ukraine, you can talk in either Russian or Ukrainian in any part of the country and you would be understood and you would be responded in a different language with the expectation that you would understand. And if you don’t understand, that means you don’t come from Ukraine. That’s the reality. The war and loss of the Crimea and partial loss of Donbas, its major industrial areas, really shifted the balance toward mostly Ukrainian-speaking regions. And also what you see, and you clearly pointed to that, starting with 2014, even a little bit earlier, the younger generation chooses Ukrainian as a marker of its identity. And that started in 2014, but we have a dramatic, dramatic shift after 2022. And on the-
And we were documenting and mapping different data in time. And what we noticed a spike in the people’s self-reporting of use of Ukrainian in 2014 and 2015 at the time of the start of the war when the threat was the most clear one. This is self-reporting, that doesn’t mean that people exactly do what they believe that that’s what they’re supposed to do, and then return back to where it was by the year 2016 and 2017. So this dynamic can repeat itself, but given how long the war is going on, how big the impact, how big the stress is, and that the wave of the future is probably associated with younger people who are switching to Ukrainian. So my bet would be on Ukrainian language rising in prominence.
This is the idea that was dominant in the Russian Empire of the 19s and the beginning of the 20th century, that Russians, Ukrainians and Belorussians are really, great Russians, little Russians, and white Russians, and that they constitute one people. Yes, there are some dialectical differences. Yes, Ukrainians sing well, yes, they dance funny, but overall that doesn’t matter.
And that idea actually was really destroyed, mostly destroyed by the revolution of 1917. Because it wasn’t just social revolution that’s how it’s understood in the US and good part of the world, it was also national revolution, it was an empire, it was a revolution in the Russian Empire. And to bring this pieces of empire back within the Soviet Union, the Bolsheviks had to make concessions. And one of those concessions was recognition of the existence of Ukrainians as a separate nation, Belorussians as a separate nations, Russians as a separate nations. Endowing them with their own territorial with borders, with institutions and so on and so forth.
But there was one institution that was not reformed, that institution was called the Russian Orthodox Church. Because one of the ways that Bolsheviks dealt with it, they couldn’t eradicate religion completely. But they arrested the development of the religion, and thinking, and theology on the level as it existed before the revolution of 1917. So the Russian Orthodox Church of 1917 continued to be the Russian Orthodox Church in 1991 and in 2013. Continuing the same imperial mantra of the existence of one big Russian nation, one unified people. And when you see the formation of the ideas about nations, about foreign policy in the Russian Empire after 1991, they’re going back to the pre-Bolshevik times.
Ukrainians do that as well. Estonians do that as well. The difference is that when Ukrainians go back, they go back to the pre-1917, they had their intellectual fathers and writings of basically liberal nationalism. Or sometimes they go to the radical nationalism of Bandera, which would be not pre-1917, but pre-1945. When the Russians go to pre-Bolshevik past, looking for the ideas, looking for inspiration, looking for the narratives, what they find there is empire, what they find there are imperial projects. And that’s certainly the story of Putin’s claim, that’s the story of the argument. And to conclude the argument that he lays out there, historical argument, comes also almost directly from the narratives of the late 19s and the beginning of the 20th century. So it’s not only the argument is coming from that era, but also the argumentation is coming from that era as well.
On the top of that, there is a history of existence in the Soviet Union, and before that in one empire for a long period of time. So you see a lot of before the war, a lot of Ukrainian singers and entertainers performing in Russia and vice versa. And biography of President Zelensky certainly fits that particular model as well, that all talks about similarities. But this similarities also very often obscure things that became so important in the course of this war. And I already mentioned the book titled by President Kuchma of Ukraine, Ukraine is Not Russia. So that’s the argument, despite the fact that you think that we are the same, we behave differently. And it turned out that they behave differently. You have Bolotnaya in Moscow and police violence, and that’s the end of it. You have the Maidan in Ukraine and you have police violence, and that’s the beginning, that’s not the end. History really matters in the way why sometimes people speaking the same language with different accents behave very differently.
Russia and Russian identity was formed around the state, and has difficulty imagining itself outside of the state, and that state happened to be imperial for most of Russian history. Ukrainian project came into existence in revolt against the state. Ukraine came into existence out of the parts of different empires, which means they left different cultural impact on them. And for Ukrainians to stay together, autocratic regime so far didn’t work. It’s like the colonies of the United States. You have to find common language, you have to talk to each other. And that became part of the Ukrainian political DNA. And that became a huge factor in the war.
And very few people in Ukraine believed what Vladimir Putin was saying that Russians and Ukrainians were one and the same people, but the majority believed that they’re certainly close culturally and historically nations. And from that point of view the bombardment of the Ukrainian cities became such a shock to the Ukrainians. Because deep down they maybe looked at Syria, they looked at Chechnya, and were explaining that through the fact that there was basically such a big cultural gap and difference between Russians and those countries and those nations. But my understanding at least, most of them had difficulty imagining the war of that proportion and that ferocity, and bring that war crimes and on that level.
Not just someone who came to take, but the state that is continuation of them, that helps to provide security for them. That the Ukrainian armed forces even before the start of this war had the highest support and popularity in Ukraine. The state today functions unbelievably effectively under attacks and missile attacks, and against city government and local government. And we are witnessing when it comes to Ukraine, we’re witnessing a very important historical development where Ukrainians found their state for the first time through most of their history, and try to make a transition from successful rebels to successful managers and state builders.
What he wanted there was an ultimatum that really was there not to start negotiations, but really to stop negotiations. He demanded the withdrawal of NATO to the borders of the 1997, if I’m not mistaken. So completely something that neither leaders would accept, nor the country’s members of NATO would accept. But for me, it’s very clear that that was an excuse, that that was a justification.
And what happened later in the year 2022 and 2023 certainly confirms me in that belief. Finland joined NATO and Sweden is on the way to joining NATO. So Finland joining NATO, increased border between Russia and NATO, twofold, and probably more than that. So if NATO is the real concern, it would be probably not completely unreasonable to expect that if not every single soldier, but at least half of the Russian army fighting in Ukraine would be moved to protect the new border with NATO in Finland.
So I have no doubt that no one in Kremlin either in the past or today looks favorably or is excited about NATO moving, or the countries of Eastern Europe journey NATO. But I have very difficult time imagining that that was the primary cause of the war. And what we see also we talked about Tucker’s interview, he was surprised, but he believed that Putin was completely honest when the first 25 minutes of interview he was talking about relations between Russia and Ukraine, was talking about history. And that was also the main focus of his essay. Essay was not on NATO and Russia, his essay was on Russia and Ukraine. So that is where the real causes are. The broader context is the fall of empire and process of disintegration of empire, not the story of NATO.
And that was the most difficult times and days. And speaking about Zelensky, every I understand reasonable leader in the West was trying to convince him to leave Ukraine and to set a government in exile in Poland or in London. And it was reasonable to accept one of his predecessors Mr. Yanukovych fled Kiev. A few months before that in Afghanistan, the president of Afghanistan fled Afghanistan. That was a reasonable thing to expect, and he turned out to be very, very unreasonable in that sense. That comes with the guts, his guts and guts people around him and Ukrainians in general.
And once Ukrainians realize that they can win on the battlefield, once the Russians were defeated and withdrew from Kiev, the opportunity emerged to get out of the negotiations, which was very clear were leading, if not today then tomorrow to the complete destruction of Ukraine. And then of course, once the territory started to be liberated, things like butcher and massacres of the civilian population came to the fore, which made also very difficult, if not impossible to conduct negotiations from this moral and emotional point of view.
The victory of one side, the victory of another side, and a sort of stalemate and compromise, especially when it comes to the territories. This war is already approaching the end of the second year. I follow the news and look analysis. I don’t remember one single piece suggesting that the next year will bring peace or will bring-
And the question is whether on the part of Zelensky, this is just the change of the leadership or this is also the change of his approach to the war, and that can mean many things. One, can mean him taking more active part in planning operations. It can mean also possible change of the tactic in the war, given that counteroffensive didn’t work out. We don’t know yet. I don’t know whether President Zelensky at this point knows exactly what will come next, but this is the time when the change of the leadership in the country and in the army that is at war, it’s one of the most trying, most dangerous moments.
And in terms of whether Zelensky’s days are numbered or not, I don’t think they’re numbered, but if Ukraine stays a democracy, and I believe it’ll stay, what comes to my mind is the story of Churchill, the story of de Gaulle. In Poland, the story of Pilsudski. So once the war is over, really the electorate in the Democratic elections, they want to change the political leadership, they want to move forward. But Pilsudski came back to power, and de Gaulle came back to power, and Churchill came back to power. So no, whatever happens in the short run or medium term run, I think that Zelensky’s days in politics are not numbered.
And restructure Russia meant getting rid of the Baltics, Central Asia Caucasus and have Russians, Ukrainians, and Belorussians, including those who live in northern Kazakhstan to create one nation state. So he was a Russian nationalist, but he was thinking about Russian nation state as the state of Russians, Ukrainians, and Belorussians. And once the Soviet Union collapsed and his idea was not implemented in the 1990s, he formulated plan B, taking over by Russia of Donbas, Crimea, and southern Ukraine, the areas that now are included in the Russian constitution. So in historical terms and intellectual terms, what is happening today in the war between Russia and Ukraine is the vision on one level or another level that was formulated by the noble laureate Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, half Russian, half Ukrainian.
The famine of ’32-’33 was not exclusive Ukrainian phenomenon, but most of Ukraine in the Soviet Union died in Ukraine. And Ukraine was the only place where the policy on collecting grain were coming together with the policy of the cleansing of the political leadership, sending people from Moscow to recover the leadership and attack on Ukrainian culture. So in terms of what I learn about human nature, it’s more me learning about the ideologies of the 20th century because it’s not the only famine in the communist lands. The famine in China, which was in terms of the numbers, much more devastating than that. It’s in a different category and for a good reason, but you have Holocaust. What unites these things is the time. This is 20th century.
What unites them are the dominance in the societies that are doing that, really ideologies that not just devalued human life, but considered that actually the way forward is by destroying large group of populations defined ethnically, religiously, socially, or otherwise, which tells about the time, but tells also about humanity because for centuries before that human life was valued. There were enemies, but the idea was that human life can put and at the end of the day, they can be slaves. You can use them for productive force. Countries in the 18th century with southern Ukraine, they were looking for settlers, for people to bring and live on land. You move into the 20th century and there is mass destruction of the population in the name of ideologies, which basically are by definition destroy human lives.
And that’s what’s really so shocking and striking because that break with not just with issues of morale, not just with issues of humanity, with any common sense, what is happening. And I’m absolutely convinced that we didn’t learn the lesson. I’m absolutely convinced that we didn’t learn the lesson. With turning our page on fascism communism, we somehow decided that we are free of that. That at least in those terms, history came to and end. That what is ahead is the future and nothing of that sort. What happened would take place to a degree that people would get in trouble for comparing any statements or events that happening today with the communism or fascism. And so I feel responsibility of myself and as a historian in particular for not doing a better job about telling people that, “Well, we are who we are and we have as humans our dark side and we have to be very careful.”
A few years before that, Three Mile Island happened, which was a big, big nuclear disaster, but in terms of consequences, nothing like Chernobyl. And there in the context of the American legal culture and managerial culture, people who were operators, who were in managerial positions, that was their responsibility to take decisions. President Carter came there, but he was not calling shots on none of those issues. What you see with Chernobyl, and people who saw HBO series know that very well, the moment the high official arrives, everyone actually falls in line, it’s the official who calls the shot. And to move population from the city of Pripyat, you needed the okay coming from Moscow from the very top. So that is Soviet story, and then there is a global story of cutting corners to meet either deadlines like it was with that test that they were running at that time, or to meet production quotas. This is not just socialist thing, you can-
And then guess what? A few years later, the Soviet Union collapses very much also thanks to the mobilization of people over the issue of Chernobyl and nuclear energy. People writing about that subject call it eco-nationalism, ecological nationalism, which comes at least in part from withholding information from people. And in Ukraine, mobilization didn’t start over the issues that led to independence, didn’t start over the issue of language or didn’t start over the issue of national autonomy. It started under the slogans, “Tell us the truth about Chernobyl. We want to know whether we live in contaminated areas or not.”
And that was a very, very strong factor that crossed, not just ethnic religious linguistic lines, lines between members of the party and not members of the party of the top§ leadership and not in military and civilian because it turned out that the party card didn’t protect you from being affected by radiation. So the all national mobilization happens. The first mass manifestations are about Chernobyl, not about anything else.
But then there is a huge gray area in between big truth and small truths of recreating the environment. And that’s how you get from one to another. And then you see the KGB officers coming and taking someone out of the meeting and arresting, which was not necessary. You see the Soviet boss threatening someone to throw the person from the helicopter. So you get these Hollywood sort of things despite the fact that it’s HBO series. And they’re the best really as a film in the fourth episode where they completely decided just to hell with the reality and let’s make a film.
So they bring Legasov, one of the key characters, to the court meetings. They bring Soviet party boss, Shcherbina, he wasn’t there. They created drama there. So they got the main thing, the big truth right, and that’s why I like this production.
So let me just ask about nuclear safety because there’s an interesting point you make. You wrote in the book in Atoms and Ashes: A Global History of Nuclear Disasters, so technically nuclear energy is extremely safe. If there’s a number of people died per energy generated, it’s much safer than coal oil, for example, as far as I understand. But the case you also make is you write, quote, “Many of the political, economic, social and cultural factors that led to the accidents of the past are still with us today, making the nuclear industry vulnerable to repeating old mistakes in new and unexpected ways and any new accidents are certain to create new anti-nuclear mobilization.”
And then you continue with, “This makes the nuclear industry not only risky to operate, but also impossible to count on as a long-term solution to an overwhelming problem.” Can you explain that perspective? It’s an interesting one, speaking to the psychology when an accident does happen, it has a dramatic effect. And also speaking to the fact that accidents can happen, not because of the safety of the nuclear power plant, but of the underlying structure of government that oversees it.
So that is with us, if you look at where the future of the nuclear industry is now at this point, it’s the regimes and powers in the Middle East, that’s a big new frontier. The countries that are not particularly known for the history of democratic existence. Where we also have the situation that we had at Three Mile Island that we had at Chernobyl, this is the first generation nuclear engineers. So people who are, where the country doesn’t have a lot of experience and generations after generations working in that particular industry where it’s all new. That is certainly additional risk.
And what we got now with this current war is something that… Not that people completely didn’t expect, but didn’t happen in the past. You see the war come into the nuclear sites, Chernobyl was taken over by the Russian army or National Guard rather, on the first day of the invasion. Then there was Zaporizhzhia, the largest nuclear power plant in Europe where the battle was waged on the territory of the nuclear power plant. The missiles being fired, buildings catching fire, and the situation that brought the Fukushima disaster was there at Zaporizhzhia more than once, and Fukushima came because the reactors were shut down as they are at Zaporizhzhia, but they still needed electricity to bring water and to them down.
And in Fukushima case, it was the tsunami that cut off the supply of electricity. In the case of Zaporizhzhia, there was the warfare that was happening in the area around Zaporizhzhia that did the same effect. So we have 440 reactors in the world today, plus minus. None of them was designed to withstand the direct missile attack or to function in the conditions of the warfare. Operators they’re human, then they make mistakes like they did it Three Mile Island or Chernobyl. But think also if the war is happening around them, if they’re not sure what is happening with their families, if they don’t know whether next missile, whether will hit the control room or not, that multiplies also.
So we are in a situation where we are not done yet with the nuclear accidents. It’s not like we don’t pay attention or we don’t learn. Smart people work on that and after every accident, try to figure the way how not to step into the same trap. But next accident would actually expose new vulnerability. You deal with Chernobyl and then tsunami comes. You deal with tsunami and then war comes. And we really in that sense, we have sometimes wild imagination, but sometimes it’s difficult to imagine what can happen next. So we are not done. There will be nuclear accidents unfortunately in the future.
And that makes nuclear energy so problematic when you count on it to fight climate change. I’ll explain why. You gave the figures how many people die from burning coal, from how many people die from radiation. And it’s a good argument. Some people would question them because it’s also the issue of not just dying, but impact of radiation on cancer, on our health, which is not completely understood yet. So still there is a lot of question marks, but let’s assume what you’re saying, that’s the figures. That’s how it is. But we as people, for whatever reason are not afraid of coal, but we’re very much afraid of radiation. It’s invisible, it’s everywhere and you can’t see it.
And then you start having issues and then you have problems during the COVID, the governments closed the borders, maybe a good idea, maybe not so good ideas, isolation. So that was the way governments started to fight for access, to fight, to Moderna, to Sputnik, to whatever it’s, to vaccine. So now back to the radiation. What is happening once Chernobyl happens? That’s the highest point in the development of nuclear industry so far in terms of how many new reactors were commissioned or the licenses were issued.
The next reactor after Three Mile Island in the US go ahead was given, it seems to me 10 years ago or something like that, the Fukushima happens, the reaction is in China to that as well. They’re very much concerned. So there is a saying in the field, “Anywhere is Chernobyl everywhere.” After Fukushima, Germany decides to go nuclear-free and gets there at the expense of burning coal. So that’s how we react. And each major accident, that means global freeze on the nuclear reactor production for at least another 10 years. So that’s what I mean that nuclear industry is politic, not just in terms of technology and not just in terms of radiation, impact on health, but also politically a very, very unreliable option.
Where we are now? Well, we are now in Russia certainly trying to regain its military strength, but no one actually believes that Russia is the superpower it was imagined before 2022. We see certainly Russia finding the way to deal with the sanctions, but we don’t see certainly Russia as an economic power with any sort of a future. So it is not an implosion of the Russian military economic and political power, but it’s significantly… actually it’s diminished. So today, very difficult to imagine Russia emerging as another pole of the multipolar world. Not impossible, but the war certainly made that very problematic and much more difficult.
On the other hand, what the war did, it basically awakened the old West. United States and Western Europe transatlantic alliance. On the top of that, there are East European countries that are even much, even much stronger proponents of assistance for Ukraine than is Germany or the United States of America. So it is the replay of the Cold War story, the Return of the West, one of the chapters in my book, the Russo-Ukrainian War is called that way. We also can see the elements of the rebuilding of the Beijing-Moscow alliance of the 1950s, which was a very important part of the Cold War. It was extremely important part of the Korean War that in many ways launched also the Cold War globally.
So I see a lot of parallels of going back to the time of the Cold War and the bipolar world that emerges, it’s not anymore the world focused on Washington and Moscow. It’s more like world focused on Washington and Beijing. And then there are countries in between. There are countries in between that join one bloc or another bloc that is emerging that is not fully formed. This, in my opinion, makes the task of us historians to really go back to the Cold War and look through new perspective on the history of that conflict because there is a lot of things that we can learn.
And again, I described that in book many times about Kennedy bringing back his wisdom from World War II years. There always will be SOB who didn’t get the order or missed things that was happening on the American side as well. So people who believe that they’re in control really are not in control, and that can escalate whether they very often against their wishes. So that is one lesson, but going back to what we’re still here and why the world didn’t end up in 1962 is that the leadership, and I come to the issue that you strongly believe in that people, personalities matter, leaders matter. They were very different. Age, education, political careers, understanding what politics are and so on and so forth.
So we have a very, very paradoxical sort of situation. The crisis occurred because of the nuclear weapons, because Khrushchev put them on Cuba, but the crisis was resolved and we didn’t end in the third World War because of the nuclear weapons, because people, leaders were afraid of them. And that’s where I want to put emphasis. It’s not that the nuclear weapons created crisis or solved the crisis, it’s basically our perception of them. And we are now in the age after the Cold War era, with the new generation of voters, with the new generation of politicians. We don’t belong to the generation of bikini atoll. You maybe know what bikini is, but we think that this is something-
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 1:18 – Collapse of the Soviet Union
- 17:27 – Origins of Russia and Ukraine
- 30:30 – Ukrainian nationalism
- 38:13 – Stepan Bandera
- 1:07:13 – KGB
- 1:22:11 – War in Ukraine
- 1:58:27 – NATO and Russia
- 2:09:30 – Peace talks
- 2:23:17 – Ukrainian Army head Valerii Zaluzhnyi
- 2:29:54 – Power and War
- 2:40:45 – Holodomor
- 2:47:17 – Chernobyl
- 2:57:51 – Nuclear power
- 3:07:28 – Future of the world
Introduction
Serhii Plokhy
What happened during World War II? Was that once the Germans started to run out of manpower, they created foreign legion groups. But because those people were not Aryans, they couldn’t be trusted. So they were put under the command of Heinrich Himmler and the commando SS, and became known as SS Waffen units, and one of such units was created in Ukraine.
What happened during World War II? Was that once the Germans started to run out of manpower, they created foreign legion groups. But because those people were not Aryans, they couldn’t be trusted. So they were put under the command of Heinrich Himmler and the commando SS, and became known as SS Waffen units, and one of such units was created in Ukraine.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Serhii Plokhy, a historian at Harvard University and the director of the Ukrainian Research Institute, also at Harvard. As a historian, he specializes in the history of Eastern Europe with an emphasis on Ukraine. He wrote a lot of great books on Ukraine and Russia, the Soviet Union, on Slavic peoples in general across centuries, on Chernobyl and nuclear disasters, and on the current war in Ukraine, a book titled The Russo-Ukrainian War: The Return of History.
The following is a conversation with Serhii Plokhy, a historian at Harvard University and the director of the Ukrainian Research Institute, also at Harvard. As a historian, he specializes in the history of Eastern Europe with an emphasis on Ukraine. He wrote a lot of great books on Ukraine and Russia, the Soviet Union, on Slavic peoples in general across centuries, on Chernobyl and nuclear disasters, and on the current war in Ukraine, a book titled The Russo-Ukrainian War: The Return of History.
This is the Lex Fridman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Serhii Plokhy. What are the major explanations for the collapse of the Soviet Union? Maybe ones you agree with and ones you disagree with.
Collapse of the Soviet Union
Serhii Plokhy
Very often people confuse three different processes that were taking place in the late ’80s and early ’90s, and the one was the collapse of communism as ideology. Another was the end of the Cold War. And the third one was the end of the Soviet Union.
Very often people confuse three different processes that were taking place in the late ’80s and early ’90s, and the one was the collapse of communism as ideology. Another was the end of the Cold War. And the third one was the end of the Soviet Union.
All of this processes were interrelated, interconnected, but when people provide ideology as the explanation for all of these processes, that’s where I disagree, because ideological collapse happened on the territory of the Soviet Union in general. The Soviet Union lost the Cold War, whether we’re talking about Moscow, Leningrad, or St. Petersburg now, or Vladivostok. But the fall of the Soviet Union is about a story in which Vladivostok and St. Petersburg ended up in one country, and Kyiv, Minsk and Dushanbe ended in different countries.
The theories and explanations about how did that happen, for me, this really very helpful theories for understanding the Soviet collapse. So the mobilization from below the collapse of the center, against the background of economic collapse, against the background of ideological implosion, that’s how I look at the fall of the Soviet Union and that’s how I look at the theories that explain that collapse.
Lex Fridman
So it’s a story of geography, ideology, economics. Which are the most important to understand of what made the collapse of the Soviet Union happen?
So it’s a story of geography, ideology, economics. Which are the most important to understand of what made the collapse of the Soviet Union happen?
Serhii Plokhy
The Soviet collapse was unique, but not more unique than collapse of any other empire. What we really witnessed, or the world witnessed back in 1991, and we continue to witness today with the Russian aggression against Ukraine, is a collapse of one of the largest world empires.
The Soviet collapse was unique, but not more unique than collapse of any other empire. What we really witnessed, or the world witnessed back in 1991, and we continue to witness today with the Russian aggression against Ukraine, is a collapse of one of the largest world empires.
We talked about the Soviet Union, and now talk about Russia, as possessing plus-minus 1/6th of the surface of the Earth. You don’t get in possession of 1/6th of the earth by being a nation state. You get that sort of size as an empire. And the Soviet collapse is continuation of the disintegration of the Russian Empire that started back in 1917, that was arrested for some period of time by the Bolsheviks, by the Communist ideology, which was internationalist ideology. And then came back in full force in the late ’80s and early ’90s.
So the most important story for me, this is the story of the continuing collapse of the Russian Empire and the rise of not just local nationalism, but also rise of Russian nationalism that turned out to be as a destructive force for the imperial or multi-ethnic, multinational state, as was Ukrainian nationalism or Georgian or Estonian for that matter.
Lex Fridman
You said a lot of interesting stuff there. In 1917, Bolsheviks, internationalists, how that plays with the idea of Russian Empire and so on. But first, let me ask about US influence on this. One of the ideas is that through the Cold War, that mechanism, US had major interest to weaken the Soviet Union, and therefore the collapse could be attributed to pressure and manipulation from the United States. Is there truth to that?
You said a lot of interesting stuff there. In 1917, Bolsheviks, internationalists, how that plays with the idea of Russian Empire and so on. But first, let me ask about US influence on this. One of the ideas is that through the Cold War, that mechanism, US had major interest to weaken the Soviet Union, and therefore the collapse could be attributed to pressure and manipulation from the United States. Is there truth to that?
Serhii Plokhy
The pressure from the United States, this is part of the Cold War. And Cold War, part of that story, but it doesn’t explain the Soviet collapse. And the reason is quite simple. The United States of America didn’t want the Soviet Union to collapse and disintegrate. They didn’t want that at the start of the Cold War in 1948. We now have the strategic documents. They were concerned about that, they didn’t want to do that. And certainly they didn’t want to do that in the year 1991. As late as August of 1991, the month of the coup in Moscow, President Bush, George H.W. Bush, travels from Moscow to Kyiv and gives famous or infamous speech called Chicken Kiev speech, basically warning Ukrainians against going for independence.
The pressure from the United States, this is part of the Cold War. And Cold War, part of that story, but it doesn’t explain the Soviet collapse. And the reason is quite simple. The United States of America didn’t want the Soviet Union to collapse and disintegrate. They didn’t want that at the start of the Cold War in 1948. We now have the strategic documents. They were concerned about that, they didn’t want to do that. And certainly they didn’t want to do that in the year 1991. As late as August of 1991, the month of the coup in Moscow, President Bush, George H.W. Bush, travels from Moscow to Kyiv and gives famous or infamous speech called Chicken Kiev speech, basically warning Ukrainians against going for independence.
The Soviet collapse was a huge headache for the administration in the White House for a number of reasons. They liked to work with Gorbachev. The Soviet Union was emerging as a junior partner of the United States on the international arena. Collapse was destroying all of that. And on the top of that, there was a question of the nuclear weapons, unaccounted nuclear weapons. So the United States was doing everything humanly possible to keep the Soviet Union together in one piece until really late November of 1991, when it became clear that it was a lost cause and they had to say goodbye to Gorbachev and to the project that he introduced.
A few months later, or a year later, there was a presidential campaign and Bush was running for the second term and was looking for achievements. And there were many achievements. I basically treat him with great respect, but destruction of the Soviet Union was not one of those achievements. He was on the other side of that divide. But the politics, the political campaign, of course, have their own rules. And they produce, give birth to mythology, which we still, at least in this country, we live until now, until today.
Lex Fridman
Gorbachev is an interesting figure in all of this. Is there a possible history where the Soviet Union did not collapse and some of the ideas that Gorbachev had for the future of the Soviet Union came to life?
Gorbachev is an interesting figure in all of this. Is there a possible history where the Soviet Union did not collapse and some of the ideas that Gorbachev had for the future of the Soviet Union came to life?
Serhii Plokhy
Of course, history, on the one hand, there is a statement, it doesn’t allow for what-ifs. On the other hand, in my opinion, history is full of what-if. That’s what history is about, and certainly the Russian areas, how the Soviet Union would continue, would continue beyond, let’s say, Gorbachev’s tenure. And the argument has been made that the reforms that he introduced, that they were mismanaged and they could be managed differently, or there could be no reforms and there could be continuing stagnation. So that is all possible.
Of course, history, on the one hand, there is a statement, it doesn’t allow for what-ifs. On the other hand, in my opinion, history is full of what-if. That’s what history is about, and certainly the Russian areas, how the Soviet Union would continue, would continue beyond, let’s say, Gorbachev’s tenure. And the argument has been made that the reforms that he introduced, that they were mismanaged and they could be managed differently, or there could be no reforms and there could be continuing stagnation. So that is all possible.
What I think would happen one way or another is the Soviet collapse in a different form, on somebody else’s watch at some later period in time. Because we’re dealing with not just processes that we’re happening in the Soviet Union, we’re dealing with global processes. And the 20th century turned out to be the century of the disintegration of the empires.
You look at the globe, at the map of the world in 1914, and you compare it to the map at the end of the 20th century in 1991, 1992, and suddenly you realize that there are many candidates for being the most important event, the most important process in the 20th century. But the biggest global thing that happened was redrawing the map of the world and producing dozens, if not hundreds, of new states. That’s the outcome of the different processes of the 20th century. Look, Yugoslavia is falling apart around the same time. Czechoslovakia goes through what can be called a civilized divorce, a very, very rare occurrence in the fall of multinational states.
So yeah, the writing was on the wall, whether it would happen under Gorbachev or later, whether it would happen as the result of reforms, or as the result of no reforms. But I think that sooner later that would happen.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s very possible hundreds of years from now, the way the 20th century is written about, as the century defined by the collapse of empires. You call the Soviet Union “the last empire.” The book is called The Last Empire. So is there something fundamental about the way the world is that means it’s not conducive to the formation of empires?
Yeah, it’s very possible hundreds of years from now, the way the 20th century is written about, as the century defined by the collapse of empires. You call the Soviet Union “the last empire.” The book is called The Last Empire. So is there something fundamental about the way the world is that means it’s not conducive to the formation of empires?
Serhii Plokhy
The meaning that I was putting in the term the Soviet Union as the last empire was that the Soviet collapse was the collapse of the last major European empires, traditional empires, that was there in the 18th century, 19th century, and through most of the 20th century. The Austria-Hungary died in the midst of World War I. The Ottoman Empire disintegrated. The Brits were gone and left India. And the successor to the Russian Empire called the Soviet Union was still hanging on there.
The meaning that I was putting in the term the Soviet Union as the last empire was that the Soviet collapse was the collapse of the last major European empires, traditional empires, that was there in the 18th century, 19th century, and through most of the 20th century. The Austria-Hungary died in the midst of World War I. The Ottoman Empire disintegrated. The Brits were gone and left India. And the successor to the Russian Empire called the Soviet Union was still hanging on there.
And then came 1991. And what we see even with today’s Russia, is it’s a very different sort of policies. The Russia or Russian leadership tried to learn a lesson from 1991, so there is no national republics in the Russian Federation that would have more rights than the Russian administrative units. The structure is different, the nationality policies are different, the level of Russification is much higher. So it is in many ways already a post-imperial formation.
Lex Fridman
And you’re right about that moment in 1991, the role that Ukraine played in that, seems to be a very critical role. You can describe just that, what role Ukraine played in the collapse of the Soviet Union?
And you’re right about that moment in 1991, the role that Ukraine played in that, seems to be a very critical role. You can describe just that, what role Ukraine played in the collapse of the Soviet Union?
Serhii Plokhy
History is many things, but it started in a very simple way of making notes on the yearly basis, what happened this year and that. So it’s about chronology. Chronology in the history of the collapse of the Soviet Union is very important. You have Ukrainian referendum on December 1st, 1991, and you have dissolution of the Soviet Union by the leaders of Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus one week later. And the question is why.
History is many things, but it started in a very simple way of making notes on the yearly basis, what happened this year and that. So it’s about chronology. Chronology in the history of the collapse of the Soviet Union is very important. You have Ukrainian referendum on December 1st, 1991, and you have dissolution of the Soviet Union by the leaders of Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus one week later. And the question is why.
Ukrainian referendum is the answer, but Ukrainians didn’t answer their referendum question of whether they want the Soviet Union to be dissolved or not. They answered very limited in terms of … It’s been a question whether you support the decision of [foreign language 00:13:06], your parliament, for Ukraine to go independent. And the rest was not on the ballot. So why then, one week later, the Soviet Union is gone? And President Yeltsin explained to President Bush around that time the reason why Ukraine was so important. He said that, “Well, if Ukraine is gone, Russia is not interested in this Soviet project because Russia would be outnumbered and outvoted by the Muslim republics.” So there was a cultural element.
But there was also another one. Ukraine happened to be the second-largest Soviet republic in then post-Soviet state, in terms of population, in terms of the economy, economic potential, and so on and so forth. And as Yeltsin suggested close culturally, linguistically and otherwise to Russia. So with the second-largest republic gone, Russia didn’t think that it was in Russia’s interest to continue with the Soviet Union. And around that time Yegor Gaidar, who was the chief economic advisor of Yeltsin, was telling him, “Well, we just don’t have money anymore to support other republics. We have to focus on Russia. We have to use oil and gas money within the Russian Federation.” So the state was bankrupt. Imperial projects, at least in the context of the late 20th century, they costed money. It wasn’t a money-making machine as it was back in the 18th and 19th century. And the combination of all this factors led to the processes in which Ukraine’s decision to go independent spelled the end to the Soviet Union. And if today anybody wants to restore, not the Soviet Union, but some form of Russian control over the post-Soviet space, Ukraine is as important today as it was back in December of 1991.
Lex Fridman
Let me ask you about Vladimir Putin’s statement that the collapse of the Soviet Union is one of the great tragedies of history. To what degree does he have a point? To what degree is he wrong?
Let me ask you about Vladimir Putin’s statement that the collapse of the Soviet Union is one of the great tragedies of history. To what degree does he have a point? To what degree is he wrong?
Serhii Plokhy
His formulation was that this is the greatest geopolitical catastrophe or tragedy of the 20th century. And I specifically went and looked at the text and put it in specific time when it was happening. And it was interesting that the statement was made a few weeks before the May 9 parade and celebrations of the victory, a key part of the mythology of the current Russian state. So why say things about the Soviet collapse being the largest geopolitical strategy, and not in that particular context, the Second World War?
His formulation was that this is the greatest geopolitical catastrophe or tragedy of the 20th century. And I specifically went and looked at the text and put it in specific time when it was happening. And it was interesting that the statement was made a few weeks before the May 9 parade and celebrations of the victory, a key part of the mythology of the current Russian state. So why say things about the Soviet collapse being the largest geopolitical strategy, and not in that particular context, the Second World War?
My explanation at least is that the World War II, the price was enormous, but the Soviet Union emerged as a great victor and captured half of Europe. 1991, in terms of the lives lost at that point, the price was actually very, very low. But for Putin, what was important that the state was lost, and he in particular was concerned about the division of the Russian people, which he understood back then like he understands now in very, very broad terms.
So for him, the biggest tragedy is not the loss of life, the biggest tragedy is the loss of the great power status or the unity of those whom he considered to be Russian nations. So at least this is my reading, this is my understanding of what is there, what is on the paper, and what is between the lines.
Lex Fridman
So both the unity of the, quote, Russian Empire and the status of the superpower?
So both the unity of the, quote, Russian Empire and the status of the superpower?
Serhii Plokhy
That’s how I read it.
That’s how I read it.
Origins of Russia and Ukraine
Lex Fridman
You wrote a book, The Origins of the Slavic Nations. So let’s go back into history. What is the origin of Slavic nations?
You wrote a book, The Origins of the Slavic Nations. So let’s go back into history. What is the origin of Slavic nations?
Serhii Plokhy
We can look at that from different perspectives, and we are now making major breakthroughs in answering this question with the very interesting, innovative linguistic analysis, the study of DNA. So that’s really the new frontier. We are getting into a pre-historical period where there is no historical sources.
We can look at that from different perspectives, and we are now making major breakthroughs in answering this question with the very interesting, innovative linguistic analysis, the study of DNA. So that’s really the new frontier. We are getting into a pre-historical period where there is no historical sources.
And from what we can understand today, and that can of course change tomorrow with all these breakthroughs in sciences, is that the Slavs came into existence somewhere in the area of Pripyat Marshes, the northwestern part of Ukraine, southwestern part of Belarus, eastern part of Poland. And that is considered to be historical homeland of Slavs. And then they spread, and they spread all the way to the Adriatic. So we have Kurds, we have Russians spreading all the way to the Pacific. We have Ukrainians, we have Belarusians, Poles. Once we had Czechoslovaks, now we have Czechs and Slovaks. That’s the story of starting with the 8th and 9th century, even a little bit early, we can already follow that story with the help of the written sources, mostly from Byzantine, then later from Western Europe.
But what I was trying to do, not being a scientist, not being an expert in linguistics, or not being an expert in DNA analysis, I was trying to see what was happening in the minds of those peoples, and their elites in particular. Whom we call today not Slavs, but Eastern Slavs, which means Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians. How they imagined themselves, how they imagined their world. And eventually I look at the so-called nation-building projects.
So trying to answer the question of how we arrived to the situation in which we are today, where there are not just three East Slavic nations, but there are also three East Slavic states, Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian. This is the focus of my book. And admittedly, in that particular book, I end on the 18th century before the era of nationalism. But then there are other books like Lost Kingdom, where I bring the story all the way up to today.
Lex Fridman
What aspects of the 8th and 9th century the East Slavic states permeates to today that we should understand?
What aspects of the 8th and 9th century the East Slavic states permeates to today that we should understand?
Serhii Plokhy
Well, the most important one is that the existence of the state of Kievan Rus, back during the medieval period, created the foundations for historical mythology, common historical mythology. And there are just wars and battles over who has the right or more right for Kievan Rus.
Well, the most important one is that the existence of the state of Kievan Rus, back during the medieval period, created the foundations for historical mythology, common historical mythology. And there are just wars and battles over who has the right or more right for Kievan Rus.
The legal code that was created at that time existed for a long period of time. The acceptance of Christianity from Byzantium, that became a big issue that separated then Eastern Slavs from their Western neighbors, including Czechs and Poles, but united in that way to, let’s say, Bulgarians or Serbs. And the beginning of the written literature, beginning in Kyiv. So all of that is considered to be part of heritage, all of that is being contested. And this debates that were academic for a long period of time, what we see now tragically are being continued on the battlefield.
Lex Fridman
What is Kyiv? What is Rus that you mentioned? What’s the importance of these? You mentioned them as the defining places and terms, labels, at the beginning of all of this, so what is Kyiv?
What is Kyiv? What is Rus that you mentioned? What’s the importance of these? You mentioned them as the defining places and terms, labels, at the beginning of all of this, so what is Kyiv?
Serhii Plokhy
Kyiv became a capital or the outpost of the Vikings who were trying to establish control over the trade route between what is today’s western Russia and Belarus and northern Ukraine, so the forest areas. And the biggest and the richest market in the world that existed at that time, which was in Constantinople, in Byzantium.
Kyiv became a capital or the outpost of the Vikings who were trying to establish control over the trade route between what is today’s western Russia and Belarus and northern Ukraine, so the forest areas. And the biggest and the richest market in the world that existed at that time, which was in Constantinople, in Byzantium.
The idea was to get whatever goods you can get in that part of Eastern Europe, and most of those goods were slaves, local population. Put them on the ships in Kyiv, because Kyiv was on the border with the steppe zones. Steppe zones were controlled by other groups, Scythians, Sarmations, Polovtsians, Pechenegs, and so on, and you name it. And then staying on the river, being protected from attacks of the nomads to come to the Black Sea and sell these products in Constantinople. That was the idea, that was the model.
Vikings tried to practice that sort of business model also in other parts of Europe, and like in other parts of Europe, they turned out to be by default creators of new politics, of new states. And that was the story of the first Kievan dynasty, and Kyiv as the capital of that huge empire that was going from the Baltics to today, central Ukraine, and then was trying to get through the southern Ukraine to the Black Sea, that was a major, major European state kingdom, if you want to call it, of medieval Europe. Creating a lot of tradition in terms of dynasty, in terms of language, in terms of religion, in terms of, again, historical mythology. So Kyiv is central for the nation-building myth of a number of groups in the region.
Lex Fridman
In one perspective and narrative, Kyiv is at the center of this Russian Empire. At which point does Moscow come to prominence as the center of the Russian Empire?
In one perspective and narrative, Kyiv is at the center of this Russian Empire. At which point does Moscow come to prominence as the center of the Russian Empire?
Serhii Plokhy
Well, the Russian Empire is a term and really creation of the 18th century. What we have for the Kievan, we call it Kievan Rus, again, this is a term of the 19th century, they call themselves Rus.
Well, the Russian Empire is a term and really creation of the 18th century. What we have for the Kievan, we call it Kievan Rus, again, this is a term of the 19th century, they call themselves Rus.
Lex Fridman
Rus.
Rus.
Serhii Plokhy
And there was metropolitanate of Rus and there was Rus principalities. So very important to keep in mind that Rus is not Russia because that was a self-name for all multiple groups on that territory. And Moscow doesn’t exist at the time when Kyiv emerges as the capital. The first reference to Moscow comes from the 12th century when it was founded by one of the Kievan princes.
And there was metropolitanate of Rus and there was Rus principalities. So very important to keep in mind that Rus is not Russia because that was a self-name for all multiple groups on that territory. And Moscow doesn’t exist at the time when Kyiv emerges as the capital. The first reference to Moscow comes from the 12th century when it was founded by one of the Kievan princes.
And Moscow comes to prominence really in a very different context and with a very different empire running the show in the region. The story of Moscow and the rise of Moscow, this is the story of the Mongol rule over former Rus lands and former Rus territories. The part of the former Rus eventually overthrows the Mongol control with the help of the small group of people called Lithuanians, which had a young state and young dynasty, and united this lands, which were mostly in today’s terms Ukrainian and Belorussian. So they separate early. And what is today’s Russia, mostly western Russia, central Russia, stays under the Mongol control up until late 15th century.
And that was the story when Moscow rises as the new capital of that realm, replacing the city of Vladimir as that capital. For those who ever went to Russia, they familiar with, of course, Vladimir as the place of the oldest architectural monuments, the so-called the Golden Ring of Russia, and so on and so forth. Vladimir is central, and there were so many architectural monuments there because before there was Moscow, there was Vladimir. Eventually in this struggle over control of the territory, struggle for favors from the Mongols and the Tatar Horde, Moscow emerges as the center of that particular realm under Mongols.
After the Mongol rule is removed, Moscow embarks on the project that historians, Russian historians of the 19th century, called the “gathering of the Russian lands.” Using Russian now for Rus and trying to bring back the lands of former Kievan Rus, but also the lands of the former Mongol Empire. The Russians get to the Pacific before they get to Kyiv historically, and really the, quote, unquote, “gathering of the,” quote, unquote, “Russian lands.” As only in 1945, when the Soviet Union bullies the Czechoslovak government into turning what is today’s Transcarpathian Ukraine to the Soviet Union. It is included in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.
So that’s the moment when that destiny, the way how it was imagined by the 19th century Russian historian, was eventually fulfilled. Moscow was in control of all these lands.
Lex Fridman
To what degree are the Slavic people one people, and this is the theme that will continue throughout, I think, versus a collection of multiple peoples? Whether we’re talking about the Kievan Rus or we’re talking about the 19th century Russian Empire conception.
To what degree are the Slavic people one people, and this is the theme that will continue throughout, I think, versus a collection of multiple peoples? Whether we’re talking about the Kievan Rus or we’re talking about the 19th century Russian Empire conception.
Serhii Plokhy
Well, a number of ways to look at that. One, the most obvious, the most clear, is language. And there is no question that Poles speak a separate language than the Slavs. And there is no question for anyone going to Ukraine and here in Ukrainian, realizing that this is not Russian. The level of comprehension can be different, you can understand certain words and you don’t understand others. And the same would be with Polish, and the same would be with Czech.
Well, a number of ways to look at that. One, the most obvious, the most clear, is language. And there is no question that Poles speak a separate language than the Slavs. And there is no question for anyone going to Ukraine and here in Ukrainian, realizing that this is not Russian. The level of comprehension can be different, you can understand certain words and you don’t understand others. And the same would be with Polish, and the same would be with Czech.
So there is this linguistic history that is in common, but languages very clearly indicate that you’re dealing with different peoples. We know that language is not everything. Americans speak a particular way of English, Australians speak a particular variant of English. But for reasons of geography, history, we pretty much believe that despite linguistic unity, these are different nations and different peoples. And there are some parts of political tradition more in common, others are quite different.
So the same when it comes to language, the same when it comes to political tradition, to the loyalty to the political institution, applies to Slavic nations. Again, there is nothing particularly unique about the Slavs in that regard.
Ukrainian nationalism
Lex Fridman
You wrote the book, The Cossack Myth: History and Nationhood in the Age of Empires. It tells the story of an anonymous manuscript called The History of the Rus. It started being circulated in the 1820s. I would love it if you can tell the story of this. This is supposedly one of the most impactful texts in history, modern history. So what’s the importance of this text? What did it contain? How did it define the future of the region?
You wrote the book, The Cossack Myth: History and Nationhood in the Age of Empires. It tells the story of an anonymous manuscript called The History of the Rus. It started being circulated in the 1820s. I would love it if you can tell the story of this. This is supposedly one of the most impactful texts in history, modern history. So what’s the importance of this text? What did it contain? How did it define the future of the region?
Serhii Plokhy
In the first decades of the 19th century, after Napoleonic Wars, a mysterious text emerged that was attributed to an Orthodox archbishop that was long dead, which was claiming that the Cossacks of Ukraine were in fact the original Rus people, and that they had the right for particular place, for central place, in the Russian Empire. And it tells the history of the Cossacks. It’s the era of romanticism, full of all sorts of drama, there are heroes, there are villains.
In the first decades of the 19th century, after Napoleonic Wars, a mysterious text emerged that was attributed to an Orthodox archbishop that was long dead, which was claiming that the Cossacks of Ukraine were in fact the original Rus people, and that they had the right for particular place, for central place, in the Russian Empire. And it tells the history of the Cossacks. It’s the era of romanticism, full of all sorts of drama, there are heroes, there are villains.
And the text captivates the attention of some key figures in the Russian intellectual elite in St. Petersburg, people like Kondraty Ryleyev, who was executed for his participation in 1825 uprising. Writes poetry on the basis of this text. Pushkin pays attention to it as well. And then comes along the key figure in Ukrainian national revival, of the 19th century Ukrainian national project, Taras Shevchenko, and reads it as well, and they all read it very differently. Eventually, by the beginning of the mid 20th century, some of the Russian, mostly nationalist writers, call this text the Quran of Ukrainian nationalism.
So what is there? The story, it’s very important in a sense that what the authors, and that’s what I claim in the book, what the authors of the text were trying to say, they were trying to say that the Cossack elite should have the same rights as the Russian nobility. And brings the long historical records to prove how cold the Cossacks were over the period of time.
But at the beginning of the 19th century, they put this claim already, they use new arguments, and these arguments are about nation and nationalism. And they’re saying that the Cossacks are a separate nation, and that’s a big, big, big claim. The Russian Empire, and this is a very, very good argument in historiography, that Russian Empire grew and acquired this 1/6th of the Earth by using one very specific way of integrating those lands. It integrated the elites. It was making deals with the elites. Whether their elites were Muslim or their elites were Roman Catholic, as the case with the Poles, they would be-
Serhii Plokhy
… were Roman Catholic, as the case with the Poles. The elites would be integrated, and the empire was based on the state loyalty and the state integration. But once you bring in the factor of nation and nationalism and language, then, once in a sudden, the whole model of the integration of the elites, irrespective of their language, religion, and culture, starts falling apart. And the Poles were the first who really produced this sort of a challenge to the Russian Empire, by two uprisings in the 19th century. And Ukrainians then followed in their footsteps.
… were Roman Catholic, as the case with the Poles. The elites would be integrated, and the empire was based on the state loyalty and the state integration. But once you bring in the factor of nation and nationalism and language, then, once in a sudden, the whole model of the integration of the elites, irrespective of their language, religion, and culture, starts falling apart. And the Poles were the first who really produced this sort of a challenge to the Russian Empire, by two uprisings in the 19th century. And Ukrainians then followed in their footsteps.
So, the importance of the tax is that it was making claim on the part of a particular estate, the Cossack Officer Class, which was that empire could survive. But it turned it, given the conditions of the time, into the claim for the special role of Cossacks as a nation, creating that this is a separate nation, Russian nation. And that is the challenge of nationalism that no empire really survived, and the Russian Empire was not an exception. So, there’s a turning point when the discourse switches from loyalty based on the integration of the elites to the loyalty based on attachment to your nation, to your language, and to your culture, and to your history.
Lex Fridman
So that was like the initial spark, the flame, that led to nationalist movements.
So that was like the initial spark, the flame, that led to nationalist movements.
Serhii Plokhy
That was the beginning and the beginning that was building a bridge between the existence of the Cossack state in the 17th and 18th century that was used as a foundation for the Cossack mythology, Ukrainian national mythology, went into the Ukrainian National Anthem, and the new age and the new stage where the Cossacks were not there anymore, whether they were professors, intellectuals, students, members of the national and organizations. And it started, of course, with romantic poetry, it was started with collected folklore, and then, later goes to the political stage, and eventually the stage of mass politics.
That was the beginning and the beginning that was building a bridge between the existence of the Cossack state in the 17th and 18th century that was used as a foundation for the Cossack mythology, Ukrainian national mythology, went into the Ukrainian National Anthem, and the new age and the new stage where the Cossacks were not there anymore, whether they were professors, intellectuals, students, members of the national and organizations. And it started, of course, with romantic poetry, it was started with collected folklore, and then, later goes to the political stage, and eventually the stage of mass politics.
Lex Fridman
So to you, even throughout the 20th century under Stalin, there was always a force within Ukraine that wants it to be independent.
So to you, even throughout the 20th century under Stalin, there was always a force within Ukraine that wants it to be independent.
Serhii Plokhy
There were five attempts for Ukraine to declare its independence and to maintain it in the 20th century. Only one succeeded in 1991, but there were four different attempts at times before. And you see the Ukrainian national identity manifest in itself in two different ways, in the form of national communism after the Bolshevik victory in the Bolshevik-controlled Ukraine, and in the form of radical nationalism in the parts of Ukraine that were controlled by Poland and Romania, and part of that was also controlled by Czechoslovakia and later Hungary. So, in those parts outside of the Soviet Union, the form of the national mobilization, the key form of national mobilization, became radical nationalism. In Soviet Ukraine, it was national communism that came back in the 1960s and 1970s. And then, in the 1991, the majority of the members of the Ukrainian Parliament, who voted for independence, were members of the Communist Party. So that spirit on certain level never died.
There were five attempts for Ukraine to declare its independence and to maintain it in the 20th century. Only one succeeded in 1991, but there were four different attempts at times before. And you see the Ukrainian national identity manifest in itself in two different ways, in the form of national communism after the Bolshevik victory in the Bolshevik-controlled Ukraine, and in the form of radical nationalism in the parts of Ukraine that were controlled by Poland and Romania, and part of that was also controlled by Czechoslovakia and later Hungary. So, in those parts outside of the Soviet Union, the form of the national mobilization, the key form of national mobilization, became radical nationalism. In Soviet Ukraine, it was national communism that came back in the 1960s and 1970s. And then, in the 1991, the majority of the members of the Ukrainian Parliament, who voted for independence, were members of the Communist Party. So that spirit on certain level never died.
Stepan Bandera
Lex Fridman
So, there’s national communism and radical nationalism. Well, let me ask you about the radical nationalism, because that is a topic that comes up in the discussion of the war in Ukraine today. Can you tell me about Stepan Bandera? Who was he, this controversial far-right Ukrainian revolutionary?
So, there’s national communism and radical nationalism. Well, let me ask you about the radical nationalism, because that is a topic that comes up in the discussion of the war in Ukraine today. Can you tell me about Stepan Bandera? Who was he, this controversial far-right Ukrainian revolutionary?
Serhii Plokhy
The [inaudible 00:38:32] lists two Stepan Banderas. One is the real person and another is mythology that really comes with this name. And the real person was a young student, nationalistically oriented student, in the late 1920s and early 1930s in the part of Ukraine that was controlled by Poland, who belonged to the generation who regretted that they were not born in time for the big struggles of the World War I and Revolution at that time. They believed that their fathers lost opportunity for Ukraine to become independent and that a new ideology was needed, and that ideology was radical nationalism, and new tactics were needed.
The [inaudible 00:38:32] lists two Stepan Banderas. One is the real person and another is mythology that really comes with this name. And the real person was a young student, nationalistically oriented student, in the late 1920s and early 1930s in the part of Ukraine that was controlled by Poland, who belonged to the generation who regretted that they were not born in time for the big struggles of the World War I and Revolution at that time. They believed that their fathers lost opportunity for Ukraine to become independent and that a new ideology was needed, and that ideology was radical nationalism, and new tactics were needed.
So, Bandera becomes the leader of the organization of Ukrainian Nationalists in Ukraine at the young age and organizes a number of assassinations of the Polish officials or members of the Ukrainian community who this young people, in their 17, 18, 19, considered to be collaborators. He is arrested, put on trial, and that’s where the myth of Bandera starts to emerge, because he uses the trial to make statements about the Ukrainian nationalism, radical nationalism, and its goals, and suddenly, becomes a hero among the Ukrainian youth at that time. He is sentenced for execution for death. So, when he delivers his speech, he knows that he probably would die soon, and then it was, the sentence was commuted to life in prison.
Then World War II happens. The Polish state collapses under the pressure coming, of course, from Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. Bandera walks away and presides over the act of the split of the organization of Ukrainian Nationalists into two groups. The most radical one used called Revolutionary, they call themselves Revolutionary, is led by Bandera. They worked together with the Nazi Germany at that time, with the hope that Nazi Germany would deliver them independent Ukraine.
First days of the German attack, Nazi attack on the Soviet Union, the units formed on the basis of Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists marching to the city of Lviv and declare Ukrainian independence. That was not sanctioned by the German authorities. That was not in German plans. So, they arrest Bandera, members of his family, his brothers, members of the leaders, leaders of the organization. So, his two brothers go to Auschwitz, die there. He was sent to Sachsenhausen for the most duration of the war, until 1944, refusing to revoke declaration of Ukrainian independence, which, again, contributes further to his mythology.
After the war, he never comes back to Ukraine. He lives in exile in Munich. So, between 1930 and his death in 1959, he spent in Ukraine maybe up to two years, maybe a little bit more, but most of the time was either in the Polish prison, or in the German concentration camp, or in exile.
But the myth of Bandera lived. And all the members of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and then the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, that fought against the Soviets all the way into the early 1950s, they were called Banderites. They were called Banderites by the Soviet authorities. They were known also in that way to the local population. So, there was a faraway leader that barely was there on the spot, but whose name was attached to this movement for, really, liberation of Ukraine at that time. Again, the battle that failed.
Lex Fridman
The fact that he collaborated with the Nazis sticks. From one perspective, he’s considered by many to be a hero of Ukraine for fighting for the independence of Ukraine. From another perspective, coupled with the fact that there’s this radical, revolutionary extremist flavor to the way he sees the world, that label just stays that he’s a fascist, he’s a Nazi. To what degree is this true? To what degree is it not?
The fact that he collaborated with the Nazis sticks. From one perspective, he’s considered by many to be a hero of Ukraine for fighting for the independence of Ukraine. From another perspective, coupled with the fact that there’s this radical, revolutionary extremist flavor to the way he sees the world, that label just stays that he’s a fascist, he’s a Nazi. To what degree is this true? To what degree is it not?
Serhii Plokhy
This label is certainly promoted, first, by the Soviet propaganda, and then by Russian propaganda. It works very nicely. If you focus on the years of collaboration, those were the same years when Joseph Stalin collaborated with Hitler, right? So, we have the same reason to call Stalin Nazi collaborator as we have the reason to call Bandera Nazi collaborator. We look at the situation in the Pacific, in Indonesia, in other places, the leaders who worked together with Japanese, with the idea of promoting independence of their countries after the Japanese collapse, become leaders of the empire. So, the difference with Bandera is that he never becomes the leader, the leader of empire, and immunity that comes with that position certainly doesn’t apply to him.
This label is certainly promoted, first, by the Soviet propaganda, and then by Russian propaganda. It works very nicely. If you focus on the years of collaboration, those were the same years when Joseph Stalin collaborated with Hitler, right? So, we have the same reason to call Stalin Nazi collaborator as we have the reason to call Bandera Nazi collaborator. We look at the situation in the Pacific, in Indonesia, in other places, the leaders who worked together with Japanese, with the idea of promoting independence of their countries after the Japanese collapse, become leaders of the empire. So, the difference with Bandera is that he never becomes the leader, the leader of empire, and immunity that comes with that position certainly doesn’t apply to him.
But there are other parts of his life which certainly put this whole thing in question. The fate of his family, his own time in the German concentration camp, certainly don’t fit the propaganda one-sided image of Bandera.
In terms of him being a hero, that’s a very, very interesting question, because he is perceived in Ukraine today, not by all, and probably not by the majority, but by many people in Ukraine, as a symbol of fighting against the Soviet Union and, by extension, against Russia and Russian occupation. So, his popularity grew after February 24, 2022 as a symbol of that resistance. Again, we are talking here about myth and mythology, because Bandera was not leading the fight against the Soviet occupation in Ukraine because, at that time, he was just simply not in Ukraine. He was in Germany. And you can imagine that geography mattered at that time much more than it matters today.
Lex Fridman
There’s a million questions to ask here. I think it’s an important topic, because it is at the center of the claimed reason that the war continues in Ukraine. So, I would like to explore that from different angles. But just to clarify, was there a moment where Bandera chose Nazi Germany over the Red Army when the war already began? So, in the list of allegiances, is Ukraine’s independence more important than fighting Nazi Germany, essentially?
There’s a million questions to ask here. I think it’s an important topic, because it is at the center of the claimed reason that the war continues in Ukraine. So, I would like to explore that from different angles. But just to clarify, was there a moment where Bandera chose Nazi Germany over the Red Army when the war already began? So, in the list of allegiances, is Ukraine’s independence more important than fighting Nazi Germany, essentially?
Serhii Plokhy
The Ukrainian independence was their goal, and they were there to work with anybody who would support and, in one way, or at least allow the Ukrainian independence. So, there is no question that they are just classic nationalists. So, the goal is, nationalism is the principle according to which the, or at least one definition is, according to which the cultural boundaries coincide with political boundaries. So, their goal was to create political boundaries that would coincide with the geographic boundaries in the conditions of the World War II, and certainly making deals with whoever would either support, as I said, or tolerate that project of theirs.
The Ukrainian independence was their goal, and they were there to work with anybody who would support and, in one way, or at least allow the Ukrainian independence. So, there is no question that they are just classic nationalists. So, the goal is, nationalism is the principle according to which the, or at least one definition is, according to which the cultural boundaries coincide with political boundaries. So, their goal was to create political boundaries that would coincide with the geographic boundaries in the conditions of the World War II, and certainly making deals with whoever would either support, as I said, or tolerate that project of theirs.
Lex Fridman
So, I would love to find the line between nationalism, even extreme nationalism, and fascism and Nazism. So, for Bandera, the myth, the Bandera the person, let’s look at some of the ideology of Nazism. To which degree did he hate Jews? Was he anti-Semitic?
So, I would love to find the line between nationalism, even extreme nationalism, and fascism and Nazism. So, for Bandera, the myth, the Bandera the person, let’s look at some of the ideology of Nazism. To which degree did he hate Jews? Was he anti-Semitic?
Serhii Plokhy
We know that, basically, in his circle, there were people who were anti-Semites in a sense that, okay, we have the texts, right? We know that. We don’t have that information about, or that sort of text, or that sort of evidence with regard to Bandera himself.
We know that, basically, in his circle, there were people who were anti-Semites in a sense that, okay, we have the texts, right? We know that. We don’t have that information about, or that sort of text, or that sort of evidence with regard to Bandera himself.
In terms of fascism, there is very clear and there is research done that, in particularly, Italian fascism had influence on the thinking of people in that organization, including people at the top. But it is also very important to keep in mind that they call themselves nationalist and revolutionaries. And despite the fact that in 1939 and 1940 and 1941, it was very beneficial for them to declare themselves to be Ukrainian fascists and establish this bond, not just with Italy, but with Nazi Germany. They refused to do that. And then, they used to recall their independence. So, influences, yes, but clearly, it’s a different type of political project.
Lex Fridman
So, let me fast-forward into the future and see to which degree the myth permeates. Does Ukraine have a neo-Nazi problem?
So, let me fast-forward into the future and see to which degree the myth permeates. Does Ukraine have a neo-Nazi problem?
Serhii Plokhy
My understanding is there are Nazis in Ukraine and there are supporters of white supremacy theories, but also my understanding is that they are extremely marginal and they are more marginal than the same sort of groups are in Central Europe, maybe in the U.S. as well. And for me, the question is not whether the Ukraine has it, but why even in the conditions of the war, the radical nationalism and extremism and white supremacist is such a marginal force, when in the countries that are not at the war, you look at France, you look at, again, it’s not exactly Nazis, but really right radical right is becoming so important.
My understanding is there are Nazis in Ukraine and there are supporters of white supremacy theories, but also my understanding is that they are extremely marginal and they are more marginal than the same sort of groups are in Central Europe, maybe in the U.S. as well. And for me, the question is not whether the Ukraine has it, but why even in the conditions of the war, the radical nationalism and extremism and white supremacist is such a marginal force, when in the countries that are not at the war, you look at France, you look at, again, it’s not exactly Nazis, but really right radical right is becoming so important.
Why Ukraine in the conditions of the war is the country that manages relations between different ethnic groups and languages in the way that strengthens political nation? So, for me, as a scholar and a researcher, what I see is that, in Ukraine, the influence of the far right in different variations is much lower than it is among some of Ukraine’s neighbors and in Europe in general. And the question is why. I don’t know. I have guesses. I don’t know answer. But that’s the question that I think is interesting to answer, how Ukraine ended up to be the only country in the world, outside of Israel, who has a Jewish president who is, my at least understanding, is the most popular president in history, in terms of how his popularity goes after the election. So, this really, from my point of view, interesting questions, and again, we can certainly debate that.
Lex Fridman
So, just for context, the most popular far right party, 1-0.15% of the vote in 2019. This is before the war. So that’s where things stood. It’s unclear where they stand now. It’d be an interesting question whether it escalated and how much. What you’re saying is that war in general can serve as a catalyst for expansion of extremist groups, of extremist nationalistic groups especially, like the far right. And it’s interesting to see to what degree they have or have not risen to power in the shadows.
So, just for context, the most popular far right party, 1-0.15% of the vote in 2019. This is before the war. So that’s where things stood. It’s unclear where they stand now. It’d be an interesting question whether it escalated and how much. What you’re saying is that war in general can serve as a catalyst for expansion of extremist groups, of extremist nationalistic groups especially, like the far right. And it’s interesting to see to what degree they have or have not risen to power in the shadows.
Serhii Plokhy
So, no nationalist or nationalistic party actually crossed the barrier to get into the Parliament.
So, no nationalist or nationalistic party actually crossed the barrier to get into the Parliament.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Serhii Plokhy
So, Ukraine is the country where there is no right or far right in the Parliament. We can’t say that about Germany, we can’t say that about France, so that’s just one more way to stress this unique place of Ukraine in that sense. And the year 2019 is the year already of the war. The war started in 2014 with the annexation of the Crimean. The front line was near Donbas. All these groups were fighting there. So, Ukraine, maybe not to a degree that it is now, was already on the war footing, and yet the right party couldn’t get more than 2%. So, that’s the question that I have in mind.
So, Ukraine is the country where there is no right or far right in the Parliament. We can’t say that about Germany, we can’t say that about France, so that’s just one more way to stress this unique place of Ukraine in that sense. And the year 2019 is the year already of the war. The war started in 2014 with the annexation of the Crimean. The front line was near Donbas. All these groups were fighting there. So, Ukraine, maybe not to a degree that it is now, was already on the war footing, and yet the right party couldn’t get more than 2%. So, that’s the question that I have in mind.
And yes, the war, historically, of course, puts forward and makes, from the more nationalist views and forces, turned them from marginal forces into more central ones. We talked about Bandera and we talked about Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists. They were the most marginal group in the political spectrum in Ukraine in the 1930s that one can only imagine. But World War II comes, and they become the most central group, because they also were, from the start go, they had the organization, the violence was basically one of their means, they knew how to fight. So, historically, wars indeed produced those results, so we are looking at Ukraine. We’re trying to see what is happening there.
Lex Fridman
So, Vladimir Putin in his interview with Tucker Carlson, but many times before, said that the current goal for the war in Ukraine is denazification, that the purpose of the war is denazification. Can you explain this concept of denazification as Putin sees it?
So, Vladimir Putin in his interview with Tucker Carlson, but many times before, said that the current goal for the war in Ukraine is denazification, that the purpose of the war is denazification. Can you explain this concept of denazification as Putin sees it?
Serhii Plokhy
Denazification is the trop that is accepted quite well by the former Soviet population and Russian population in particular. The most powerful Soviet mythology that then was basically passed as part of heritage to the Russian Federation was World War II, was fighting against fascism. So, once you use terms “fascism,” and “Nazi,” and “denazification,” suddenly people, not just start listening, they just stop analyzing. And as a propaganda tool, this is, of course, very powerful tool. In terms of to what degree this is the real goal or not, we discussed the importance of the far right in Europe and in Ukraine. So, if that’s the real goal of the war probably, the war would have to start not against Ukraine, but probably against France or some other country, if you take this at face value.
Denazification is the trop that is accepted quite well by the former Soviet population and Russian population in particular. The most powerful Soviet mythology that then was basically passed as part of heritage to the Russian Federation was World War II, was fighting against fascism. So, once you use terms “fascism,” and “Nazi,” and “denazification,” suddenly people, not just start listening, they just stop analyzing. And as a propaganda tool, this is, of course, very powerful tool. In terms of to what degree this is the real goal or not, we discussed the importance of the far right in Europe and in Ukraine. So, if that’s the real goal of the war probably, the war would have to start not against Ukraine, but probably against France or some other country, if you take this at face value.
Lex Fridman
Well, there is something really interesting here, as you mentioned, because I’ve spoken to a lot of people in Russia, and you said analysis stops. In the West, people look at the word “denazification” and look at the things we’ve just discussed and almost think this is absurd. But when you talk to people in Russia, maybe it’s deep in there somewhere, the history of World War II still reverberates through maybe the fears, maybe the pride, whatever the deep emotional history is there, it seems that the goal of denazification appears to be reasonable for people in Russia. They don’t seem to see the absurdity or the complexity or even the need for analysis, I guess, in this kind of word of denazification.
Well, there is something really interesting here, as you mentioned, because I’ve spoken to a lot of people in Russia, and you said analysis stops. In the West, people look at the word “denazification” and look at the things we’ve just discussed and almost think this is absurd. But when you talk to people in Russia, maybe it’s deep in there somewhere, the history of World War II still reverberates through maybe the fears, maybe the pride, whatever the deep emotional history is there, it seems that the goal of denazification appears to be reasonable for people in Russia. They don’t seem to see the absurdity or the complexity or even the need for analysis, I guess, in this kind of word of denazification.
Serhii Plokhy
I would say this is broader. This is broader. The war that started under the banner that Russians and Ukrainians were one and the same people and produces that sort of casualty, really goes against also any sort of logical thinking. But Russia is a place where the free press doesn’t exist already for a long period of time. Russia is the place where there is an echo chamber, to a degree.
I would say this is broader. This is broader. The war that started under the banner that Russians and Ukrainians were one and the same people and produces that sort of casualty, really goes against also any sort of logical thinking. But Russia is a place where the free press doesn’t exist already for a long period of time. Russia is the place where there is an echo chamber, to a degree.
And as war started first in 2014, and then all out war in 2022, I came across a lot of people on the personal level, but also in the media reporting, that they really can’t find common language with their close relatives in Russia, people who visited Ukraine who know that it’s not taken over by nationalists and is not taken over by Nazis, but the media around them, the neighbors around them, the people at their work, basically, say one and the same thing. And we, as humans, in general, whatever our background, we are very, very, our mind is really, it’s relatively easy to manipulate it, and to a degree that even family connections and even family ties don’t sometimes help to maintain that ability to think and to analyze on your own to look at the facts.
Lex Fridman
So, Putin has alluded to the Yaroslav Hunka incident in the Canadian Parliament September 2023. This man is a veteran of World War II on the Ukrainian side, and he got two standing ovations in the Canadian Parliament, but they later found out that he was part of the SS. So, can you explain on this, what are your thoughts on this? This had a very big effect on the narrative, I guess, propagated throughout the region.
So, Putin has alluded to the Yaroslav Hunka incident in the Canadian Parliament September 2023. This man is a veteran of World War II on the Ukrainian side, and he got two standing ovations in the Canadian Parliament, but they later found out that he was part of the SS. So, can you explain on this, what are your thoughts on this? This had a very big effect on the narrative, I guess, propagated throughout the region.
Serhii Plokhy
Yes. What happened during World War II was that once the Germans started to run out of manpower, they created foreign legion groups. But because those people were not Aryans, they were created for fighting on the battleground. Because they were not Aryans, they couldn’t be trusted. So, they were put under the command of Henry Himmler, under command of SS, and became known as SS Waffen units. And one of such units was created in Ukraine, with great difficulties, because Nazis didn’t consider Slavs to be generally worthy of even that sort of foreign legion formations. But they made an exception, because those people were coming from Galicia, which was part of Austria-Hungary, which means part of Austria, which means somehow were open to the benevolent influence of the Germanic race, and called the Division Galizien, or Galicia. Part of Ukrainian youth joined the division.
Yes. What happened during World War II was that once the Germans started to run out of manpower, they created foreign legion groups. But because those people were not Aryans, they were created for fighting on the battleground. Because they were not Aryans, they couldn’t be trusted. So, they were put under the command of Henry Himmler, under command of SS, and became known as SS Waffen units. And one of such units was created in Ukraine, with great difficulties, because Nazis didn’t consider Slavs to be generally worthy of even that sort of foreign legion formations. But they made an exception, because those people were coming from Galicia, which was part of Austria-Hungary, which means part of Austria, which means somehow were open to the benevolent influence of the Germanic race, and called the Division Galizien, or Galicia. Part of Ukrainian youth joined the division.
One of the explanations was that they were looking at the experience of World War I, and seeing that the units, the Ukrainian units, in the Austrian army then played a very important role in the fight for independence. So that is one of the explanations. You can’t just use one explanation to describe motivations of everyone and every single person who was joined in there. So, they were sent to the front. They were defeated within a few short days by the Red Army, and then were retreating through Slovakia, where they were used to fight with the partisan movement there, and eventually surrendered to the British. So, that’s the story. You can personally maybe understand what the good motivations were of this person or that person, but that is one of the best, one of the very tragic and unfortunate pages in Ukrainian history. You can’t justify that as a phenomenon.
So, from that point of view, the celebration of that experience, as opposed to looking at that, okay, that happened, and we wish that those young men who were idealistic or joined the Division for idealistic purposes had better understanding of things or made other choices, but you can’t certainly celebrate that. And once that happened, that, of course, became a big propaganda, a propaganda item, in the current war. We’re talking about 10,000-20,000 people in the Division, and we’re talking about 2-3 million Ukrainians fighting in the Red Army. And again, it’s not like Red Army is completely blameless in the way how it behaved in Prussia, in Germany, and so on and so forth. But it’s basically, it’s, again, we’re going back to the story of Bandera. So, there is a period of collaboration, and that’s what propaganda tries to define him by, or there is a Division Galizien by 20,000 people, and somehow it makes irrelevant the experience of 2-3 million people.
Lex Fridman
I mean, just to clarify, I think there is just a blunder on the Canadian Parliament side, the Canadian side, of not doing research of, maybe correct me if I’m wrong, but from my understanding, they were just doing stupid shallow political stuff. Let’s applaud, when Zelenskyy shows up, let’s have a Ukrainian veteran, let’s applaud a veteran of World War II, and then all of a sudden, you realize, well, there’s actually complexities to wars. We can talk about, for example, a lot of dark aspects on all sides of World War II, the mass rape at the end of World War II by the Red Army, when they [inaudible 01:03:40] Germany. There’s a lot of really dark complexity in it on all sides.
I mean, just to clarify, I think there is just a blunder on the Canadian Parliament side, the Canadian side, of not doing research of, maybe correct me if I’m wrong, but from my understanding, they were just doing stupid shallow political stuff. Let’s applaud, when Zelenskyy shows up, let’s have a Ukrainian veteran, let’s applaud a veteran of World War II, and then all of a sudden, you realize, well, there’s actually complexities to wars. We can talk about, for example, a lot of dark aspects on all sides of World War II, the mass rape at the end of World War II by the Red Army, when they [inaudible 01:03:40] Germany. There’s a lot of really dark complexity in it on all sides.
So, that could be an opportunity to explore the dark complexity that some of the Ukrainians were in the SS, or Bandera, the complexities there, but I think they were doing not a complex thing. They were doing a very shallow applaud. And we should applaud veterans, of course, but in that case, they were doing it for show, for Zelenskyy and so on. So, we should clarify that the applause wasn’t knowing, it wasn’t for the SS. It was for Ukrainian, it was for World War II veterans, but the propaganda, or at least an interpretation from the Russian side, from whatever side, is that they were applauding the full person standing before them, which wasn’t just a Ukrainian veteran, but Ukrainian veteran that fought for the SS.
Serhii Plokhy
I don’t have any particular insights, but I would be very much surprised if even one person in the Parliament, I mean, the members of the Parliament actually knew the whole story. I would be very surprised.
I don’t have any particular insights, but I would be very much surprised if even one person in the Parliament, I mean, the members of the Parliament actually knew the whole story. I would be very surprised.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. The whole story of this person, and frankly, the whole story of Ukraine and Russia in World War II, period.
Yeah. The whole story of this person, and frankly, the whole story of Ukraine and Russia in World War II, period.
Serhii Plokhy
Yes, yes.
Yes, yes.
Lex Fridman
Nevertheless, it had a lot of power and really reverberated in support of the narrative that there is a neo-Nazi, a Nazi problem in Ukraine.
Nevertheless, it had a lot of power and really reverberated in support of the narrative that there is a neo-Nazi, a Nazi problem in Ukraine.
Serhii Plokhy
This is the narrative that is out there, and it’s especially powerful in Russia. It’s especially powerful in Russia given that there are, really, that the atmosphere that is created, really, is not conducive to any independent analysis.
This is the narrative that is out there, and it’s especially powerful in Russia. It’s especially powerful in Russia given that there are, really, that the atmosphere that is created, really, is not conducive to any independent analysis.
Lex Fridman
Well, I wonder what is the most effective way to respond to that particular claim, because there could be a discussion about nationalism, and extreme nationalism, and the fight for independence, and whether it isn’t, like Putin wrote, “one people,” but the question of, are there Nazis in Ukraine, seems to be a question that could be analyzed rigorously with data.
Well, I wonder what is the most effective way to respond to that particular claim, because there could be a discussion about nationalism, and extreme nationalism, and the fight for independence, and whether it isn’t, like Putin wrote, “one people,” but the question of, are there Nazis in Ukraine, seems to be a question that could be analyzed rigorously with data.
Serhii Plokhy
That is being done on the academic level. But in terms of the public response and public discourse, the only response that I see is not to focus on the questions raised and put by the propaganda, because you’ve already become victim of that propaganda by definition, but talk about that much broadly and talk about different aspects of, if it is World War II, about different aspects of World War II, if it’s about issue of the far right in Ukraine, let’s talk about U.S., let’s talk about Russia, let’s talk about France, let’s compare. That’s the only way how you deal with propaganda, because propaganda is not necessarily something that is an outright lie. It can be just one factor that’s taken out of the context and is blown out of proportion. And that is good enough.
That is being done on the academic level. But in terms of the public response and public discourse, the only response that I see is not to focus on the questions raised and put by the propaganda, because you’ve already become victim of that propaganda by definition, but talk about that much broadly and talk about different aspects of, if it is World War II, about different aspects of World War II, if it’s about issue of the far right in Ukraine, let’s talk about U.S., let’s talk about Russia, let’s talk about France, let’s compare. That’s the only way how you deal with propaganda, because propaganda is not necessarily something that is an outright lie. It can be just one factor that’s taken out of the context and is blown out of proportion. And that is good enough.
KGB
Lex Fridman
And the way to defend against that is to bring in the context. Let us move gracefully throughout, back and forth through history, back to Bandera. You wrote a book on the KGB spy Bohdan Stashynsky. Can you tell his story?
And the way to defend against that is to bring in the context. Let us move gracefully throughout, back and forth through history, back to Bandera. You wrote a book on the KGB spy Bohdan Stashynsky. Can you tell his story?
Serhii Plokhy
This is a story of the history of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, and Bandera as well, already after the end of the Second World War.
This is a story of the history of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, and Bandera as well, already after the end of the Second World War.
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Serhii Plokhy
Because what you got after the Second World War, so imagine May of 1945, the Red Banner is all over Riksdag, the Red Army is in control of half of Europe, but the units of the Red Army are still fighting the war, and not just behind the Soviet lines, but within the borders of the Soviet Union.
Because what you got after the Second World War, so imagine May of 1945, the Red Banner is all over Riksdag, the Red Army is in control of half of Europe, but the units of the Red Army are still fighting the war, and not just behind the Soviet lines, but within the borders of the Soviet Union.
Serhii Plokhy
… behind the Soviet lines, but within the borders of the Soviet Union. And this war continues all the way into the early 1950s, almost up to Stalin’s death.
… behind the Soviet lines, but within the borders of the Soviet Union. And this war continues all the way into the early 1950s, almost up to Stalin’s death.
The war is conducted by the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, which have a Ukrainian insurgent army, and the government tries to crush that resistance. So, what it does is basically recruits local people to spy on the partisans on the underground, and Bohdan Stashynsky is one of those people. His family is supporting the resistance. They provide food. His sister is engaged with one of the local commanders of this underground unit, and they know everything about Stashynsky’s family and they know everything about him because he is also collecting funds for the underground. They have a conversation with him saying that, “Okay, that’s what we got, and you and your family can go to prison, or you help us a little bit. We’re interested in the fiance of your sister, and we want to get him.” Stashynsky says yes. Once they round up the fiance, he basically betrayed a member or almost member of his family, he is done. He can’t go back to his village, he can’t go back to his study. He was studying in [inaudible 01:09:39] at that time. As I write in my book, the secret police becomes his family.
And he is sent to Kyiv. He is trained for two years, sent to East Germany, into Berlin and becomes an assassin. So, they sent him across the border to Western Germany, to Munich. It was the headquarter of different organizations, anti-Soviet organizations, Ukrainian and Russian and Georgian and so on and so forth. And he kills two leaders of the organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, one editor of the newspaper, and eventually he kills Bandera. He does that with the new weapon, a spray pistol, that eventually makes it into the bond novel, The Man with the Golden Gun. And that whole episode is a little bit reshaped, but it’s not in the film, but it is in the novel itself.
And then later has a change of mind under the influence of his German fiance and then wife. They decide to escape to the West. And while they’re doing that, they discover that their apartment was bugged and probably the KGB knows all of that. A long story short, his son dies in Berlin. KGB doesn’t allow him to go there, but his wife has a nervous breakdown so they allow him to go there to just calm her so that there would be no scandal. And two of them, one day before their son’s burial, because after that they would be sent to Moscow. They jumped the ship and go to West Berlin, two hours before the Berlin Wall was being built.
So, if they would stay for the funeral, probably the KGB would not let them go. But also if they would stay, the border would be there. And he goes to the American intelligence and says, “Okay, that’s who I am and that’s what I did.” And they look at him and they say, “We don’t trust you. We don’t know who you are. You have documents in five names. You say you killed Bandera. Well, we have a different information. He was poisoned and probably by someone in his close circle. A spray pistol, did you read too much Ian Fleming? Where does this come from?”
He insists, they said, “Okay, you insist. If you committed all those crimes, they giving you to the German police, and German police will be investigating you.” And then the trial comes, and if he says, if he takes back his testimony, the whole case against him collapses. He can go free. He knows that if he goes free, he is a target of his colleagues from the same department. So, his task at the trial is to prove that he’s guilty, that he did that.
And then he disappears and nobody knows where he goes. And there are all sorts of cover stories. And I was lucky to interview a commander, former chief of the South African Police, who confirmed to me that Stashynsky was in South Africa.
Lex Fridman
He fled.
He fled.
Serhii Plokhy
The West German intelligence thought that it was too dangerous for him to stay in Germany. They sent him under a different name to South Africa. So, that’s the story of Stashynsky himself. But going back to Bandera, of course, the fact that he confessed and it became known that KGB assassinated Bandera, that added to the image and to general mythology about Bandera.
The West German intelligence thought that it was too dangerous for him to stay in Germany. They sent him under a different name to South Africa. So, that’s the story of Stashynsky himself. But going back to Bandera, of course, the fact that he confessed and it became known that KGB assassinated Bandera, that added to the image and to general mythology about Bandera.
Lex Fridman
What a fascinating story of a village boy becoming an assassin who killed one of the most influential revolutionaries of the region in the 20th century. Just zooming out broadly on the KGB, how powerful was the KGB? What role did it play in this whole story of the Soviet Union?
What a fascinating story of a village boy becoming an assassin who killed one of the most influential revolutionaries of the region in the 20th century. Just zooming out broadly on the KGB, how powerful was the KGB? What role did it play in this whole story of the Soviet Union?
Serhii Plokhy
It depends on the period. At the time that we just described, late ’50s and early ’60s, they were not powerful at all. And the reasons for that was that people like Khrushchev were really concerned about the secret police becoming too powerful. It became too powerful in their mind under Stalin, under Beria. And it was concern about Beria’s power as a secret police chief that led to the coup against Beria, and Khrushchev come into power, and Beria was arrested and executed. And what Khrushchev was trying to do after that was trying to put… Since ’54, the name was already KGB, KGB under his control. So, he was appointing the former [inaudible 01:15:33] leaders as the heads of the KGB, so the people who really owned everything to him, that sort of position. And the heads of the KGB were not members of Politburo.
It depends on the period. At the time that we just described, late ’50s and early ’60s, they were not powerful at all. And the reasons for that was that people like Khrushchev were really concerned about the secret police becoming too powerful. It became too powerful in their mind under Stalin, under Beria. And it was concern about Beria’s power as a secret police chief that led to the coup against Beria, and Khrushchev come into power, and Beria was arrested and executed. And what Khrushchev was trying to do after that was trying to put… Since ’54, the name was already KGB, KGB under his control. So, he was appointing the former [inaudible 01:15:33] leaders as the heads of the KGB, so the people who really owned everything to him, that sort of position. And the heads of the KGB were not members of Politburo.
It changed in the ’70s with Andropov where KGB started to play, again, very important role in the Soviet history. And let’s say decisions on Afghanistan and the Soviet troops marching into Afghanistan were made by the, apart from Brezhnev, by the trio of the people who would be called today [foreign language 01:16:15] maybe or not all of them were [foreign language 01:16:17] but one of course was Andropov, the head of the KGB. Another was the Minister of Defense, and then there was secretary in charge of the military industrial complex, Ministry of Foreign Minister of Foreign Affairs.
But the head of the KGB became really not just the member of Politbruo, but the member of that inner circle. And then the fact that on Andropov succeeds Brezhnev is also a manifestation of the power that KGB acquired really after Khrushchev in the 1970s, and then going into the 1980s.
Lex Fridman
Who was more powerful, the KGB or the CIA during the Soviet Union?
Who was more powerful, the KGB or the CIA during the Soviet Union?
Serhii Plokhy
The CIA, it’s the organization that is charged with the information gathering and all sorts of operations, including assassinations in the ’50s and ’60s abroad. The KGB was the organization that really had both the surveillance over the population within the Soviet Union and also the operations abroad. And its members, its leaders were members of the inner circle for making decisions. Again, from what I understand about the way how politics and decision work and decisions are made in the United States, the CIA, the chief of the CIA is not one of the decision-making group that providing information. Yeah, so I would say it’s not day and night, but their power, political influence, political significance, very different.
The CIA, it’s the organization that is charged with the information gathering and all sorts of operations, including assassinations in the ’50s and ’60s abroad. The KGB was the organization that really had both the surveillance over the population within the Soviet Union and also the operations abroad. And its members, its leaders were members of the inner circle for making decisions. Again, from what I understand about the way how politics and decision work and decisions are made in the United States, the CIA, the chief of the CIA is not one of the decision-making group that providing information. Yeah, so I would say it’s not day and night, but their power, political influence, political significance, very different.
Lex Fridman
Is it understood how big the KGB was? How widespread it was, given its secretive and distributed nature.
Is it understood how big the KGB was? How widespread it was, given its secretive and distributed nature.
Serhii Plokhy
Certain things we know, others we don’t, because the Stasi archives are open and most of the KGB, especially in Moscow, they’re not. But we know that the KGB combined not only the internal sort of secret police functions at home and counter intelligence branch and intelligence branch abroad, but also the border troops for example.
Certain things we know, others we don’t, because the Stasi archives are open and most of the KGB, especially in Moscow, they’re not. But we know that the KGB combined not only the internal sort of secret police functions at home and counter intelligence branch and intelligence branch abroad, but also the border troops for example.
So, really institutionally it was a huge, huge mammoth. And another thing that we know we can sort of extrapolate from what we know from the Stasi archives, that the surveillance at home, the surveillance was really massive. The guess is the Soviets were not as effective and as meticulous and as scrupulous and as methodical as probably as Germans were. But that gives you a basic idea of how penetrated the entire society was.
Lex Fridman
What do you think is important to understand about the KGB, if we want to also understand Vladimir Putin? Since he was a KGB foreign intelligence officer for 16 years.
What do you think is important to understand about the KGB, if we want to also understand Vladimir Putin? Since he was a KGB foreign intelligence officer for 16 years.
Serhii Plokhy
From my research, including on Stashynsky, what I understand is that in KGB, and it was a powerful organization, again, less powerful in ’50s and ’60s, but still very powerful organization. There was on the one hand the understanding of the situation in the country and abroad that probably other organizations didn’t have. They had also first pick in terms of the select and cadres. The work in the KGB was well paid and considered to be very prestigious. So, that was part to a degree of the Soviet elite in terms of whom they recruited. And they had a resentment over the party leadership that didn’t allow them to do James Bond kind of things that they would want to do because there were political risks.
From my research, including on Stashynsky, what I understand is that in KGB, and it was a powerful organization, again, less powerful in ’50s and ’60s, but still very powerful organization. There was on the one hand the understanding of the situation in the country and abroad that probably other organizations didn’t have. They had also first pick in terms of the select and cadres. The work in the KGB was well paid and considered to be very prestigious. So, that was part to a degree of the Soviet elite in terms of whom they recruited. And they had a resentment over the party leadership that didn’t allow them to do James Bond kind of things that they would want to do because there were political risks.
After this scandal with Stashynsky, at least on many levels, the KGB stopped the practice of the assassinations, political assassinations abroad because it was considered politically to be extremely, extremely dangerous. The person who was in charge of the KGB at the time of Bandera assassination, Shelepin, was one of the candidates to replace Khrushchev and Brezhnev used against him that scandal abroad eventually to remove him from Politburo.
So, the KGB was really looking at the party leadership as to a degree, an effective corrupt and who was on their way. And from what I understand, that’s exactly the attitudes that people like Putin and people of his circle brought to power in Kremlin. So, the methods that KGB use they can use now, and there is no party or no other institution actually stopping them from doing that. And they think about, my understanding, the operations abroad about foreign policy in general in terms of the KGB mindset of planning operations and executing particular operations and so on and so forth. I think a lot of culture that came into existence in the Soviet KGB now became part of the culture of the Russian establishment.
War in Ukraine
Lex Fridman
You wrote the book, the Russo-Ukrainian War, the Return of History, that gives the full context leading up to the invasion of Ukraine by Russia in February, 2022. Can you take me through the key moments in history that led up to this war? So, we’ll mention the collapse of the Soviet Union. We could probably go much farther back, but the collapse of the Soviet Union mentioned 2014. Maybe you can highlight key moments that led up to 2022.
You wrote the book, the Russo-Ukrainian War, the Return of History, that gives the full context leading up to the invasion of Ukraine by Russia in February, 2022. Can you take me through the key moments in history that led up to this war? So, we’ll mention the collapse of the Soviet Union. We could probably go much farther back, but the collapse of the Soviet Union mentioned 2014. Maybe you can highlight key moments that led up to 2022.
Serhii Plokhy
The key moments would be first, the year 2004, known for Orange Revolution in Ukraine, and then the year 2013, known as the Revolution of Dignity. Both were the revolts against the something that by significant part of Ukrainian population was considered to be completely, completely unacceptable actions on the part of the government and people in the government at that time. The Orange Revolution of 2004 was a protest against falsified presidential elections and rejection of a candidate that was supported by Russia, publicly supported by Russia. I remember being in Moscow at that time and couldn’t believe my eyes went, in the center of Russia, I saw a billboard with Yanukovych. The trick was that there were a lot of Ukrainians in Russia and in Moscow in particular, and they had the right to vote. And it led to the election as Ukrainian president, Viktor Yushchenko, who put on the agenda the issue of Ukraine’s membership in NATO. So, it was very clear pro-Western orientation. And the second case was the Revolution of Dignity 2013, with some of the same characters including Yanukovych, who at that time was already president of Ukraine. And there the question was of the government promising the people for one year at least to sign an association agreement with European Union, and then turning over almost overnight and saying that they were not going to do that.
The key moments would be first, the year 2004, known for Orange Revolution in Ukraine, and then the year 2013, known as the Revolution of Dignity. Both were the revolts against the something that by significant part of Ukrainian population was considered to be completely, completely unacceptable actions on the part of the government and people in the government at that time. The Orange Revolution of 2004 was a protest against falsified presidential elections and rejection of a candidate that was supported by Russia, publicly supported by Russia. I remember being in Moscow at that time and couldn’t believe my eyes went, in the center of Russia, I saw a billboard with Yanukovych. The trick was that there were a lot of Ukrainians in Russia and in Moscow in particular, and they had the right to vote. And it led to the election as Ukrainian president, Viktor Yushchenko, who put on the agenda the issue of Ukraine’s membership in NATO. So, it was very clear pro-Western orientation. And the second case was the Revolution of Dignity 2013, with some of the same characters including Yanukovych, who at that time was already president of Ukraine. And there the question was of the government promising the people for one year at least to sign an association agreement with European Union, and then turning over almost overnight and saying that they were not going to do that.
And that’s how things started. But then when they became really massive and why something that was called Euro Revolution became Revolution of Dignity was when the government police beat up students in downtown Kyiv, who judging by the reports were basically already almost ready to disperse, almost ready to go home. And that’s when roughly half of Kyiv showed up on the streets. That sort of the police behavior, that sort of was absolutely unacceptable in Ukraine. The stealing elections and falsification of elections wasn’t unacceptable.
That’s where around that time and around 2004, the president of Ukraine at that time, Leonid Kuchma, writes a book called Ukraine is Not Russia. And apparently the term comes from his discussion with Putin, when Putin was suggesting to him quite strongly to use force against people [inaudible 01:26:11] on the square in Kyiv. And Kuchma allegedly said to him, “You don’t understand. Ukraine is not Russia. You can’t do things like that. You get pushed back.” And that’s, this two events, 2004 and then 2013 became really crucial point in terms of the Ukraine direction, the survival of Ukrainian democracy, which is one of very few countries in the post Soviet space where democracy survived the original flirt between the government leaders and democracy of the 1990s.
It was the old Soviet story in Russia. Everywhere else there was high democratic expectations, but they came pretty much to an end by the end of the decade. Ukraine preserved the democracy and the orientation of Ukraine toward integration in some form into Western and European structures, that Ukrainian democracy plus Western orientation was something. And in Russia, we see the strengthening of the autocratic regime under Putin, that if you look deeper, this are the processes that put the two countries on the collision course.
Lex Fridman
So, there’s a division, a push and pull inside Ukraine on identity, on whether they’re part of Russia or part of Europe. And you highlighted two moments in Ukrainian history that there’s a big flare up where the statement was first Ukraine is not Russia, and essentially Ukraine is part of Europe, but there’s other moments. What were the defining moments that began an actual war in the [inaudible 01:28:11]?
So, there’s a division, a push and pull inside Ukraine on identity, on whether they’re part of Russia or part of Europe. And you highlighted two moments in Ukrainian history that there’s a big flare up where the statement was first Ukraine is not Russia, and essentially Ukraine is part of Europe, but there’s other moments. What were the defining moments that began an actual war in the [inaudible 01:28:11]?
Serhii Plokhy
The war started in February of 2014, was the Russian takeover of Crimea by military force. The so-called Green Man. And the big question is why, and it’s very important to go back to the year 2013 and the start of the protests and the story of the Ukraine signing association agreement with European Union. So, from what we understand today, the Ukrainian government under President Yanukovych, did this suicidal sharp turn after one year of promising association agreement saying that, “Okay, we changed our mind under pressure from Moscow.” And Moscow applied that pressure for one reason, at least in my opinion.
The war started in February of 2014, was the Russian takeover of Crimea by military force. The so-called Green Man. And the big question is why, and it’s very important to go back to the year 2013 and the start of the protests and the story of the Ukraine signing association agreement with European Union. So, from what we understand today, the Ukrainian government under President Yanukovych, did this suicidal sharp turn after one year of promising association agreement saying that, “Okay, we changed our mind under pressure from Moscow.” And Moscow applied that pressure for one reason, at least in my opinion.
The Ukraine signing association agreement with European Union would mean that Ukraine would not be able to sign association agreement with any Eurasian union in any shape or form, that was at that time in the process of making. And for Vladimir Putin, that was the beginning of his, or part of his third term, one of his agenda items for the third term was really consolidation of the post-Soviet space and Eurasian space and not membership in NATO, not membership in European Union. But association agreement with European Union meant that that post-Soviet space would have to exist under Moscow’s control, but without Ukraine, the second-largest post-Soviet republic. The republic on whose vote depended the continuing existence of the Soviet Union and whose vote ended in many ways the existence of the Soviet Union.
So, that is broadly background, but also there are of course personalities. There are also their beliefs, their readings of history, and all of that became part of the story. But if you look at that geopolitically, the association agreement is put in Ukraine outside of the Russian sphere of influence. And the response was an attempt to topple the government in Kyiv that clearly was going to sign that agreement, to take over Crimea and to help to deal with a lot of issues within Russia itself and boost the popularity of the president.
And it certainly, certainly worked in that way as well. Once Ukraine, still after Crimea, continued on its path, then the next step started the so-called hybrid warfare in Donbas. But again, unlike Crimea, from what I understand, Russia was not really looking forward to taking possession of Donbas. Donbas was viewed as the way how to influence Ukraine to stop it from a drift toward the West.
Lex Fridman
Maybe you can tell me about the region of Donbas.
Maybe you can tell me about the region of Donbas.
Serhii Plokhy
I mentioned that nationalism and principle of nationalism is the principle of making the political borders to coincide with ethnic and cultural borders. And that’s how the maps of many East European countries had been drawn in the 19th and 20th century. On that principle, Donbas, where the majority constituted by the beginning of the 20th century were Ukrainians, was considered to be Ukrainian and was claimed in the middle of this revolution and revolutionary wars and civil wars by Ukrainian government.
I mentioned that nationalism and principle of nationalism is the principle of making the political borders to coincide with ethnic and cultural borders. And that’s how the maps of many East European countries had been drawn in the 19th and 20th century. On that principle, Donbas, where the majority constituted by the beginning of the 20th century were Ukrainians, was considered to be Ukrainian and was claimed in the middle of this revolution and revolutionary wars and civil wars by Ukrainian government.
But Donbas became a site, one of the key sites in the Russian Empire of early industrialization, with its mining industry, with mythological industry. So, what that meant was that people from other parts of, not Ukraine, but other parts of the Russian Empire, congregated there. That’s where jobs were. That’s how Khrushchev and his family came to Donbas. The family of Brezhnev overshoot a little bit. They got to the industrial enterprises in the city of [inaudible 01:33:13] the place, the city that was called [inaudible 01:33:16].
So, those were Russian peasants moving into the area in looking for their job. The population became quite mixed. Ukrainians still constituted the majority of the population, but not necessarily in the towns and in the cities. And culturally, the place was becoming more and more Russian as the result of that moment. Apart from the Crimea, Donbas was the part of Ukraine where the ethnic Russians were the biggest group. They were not the majority, but they were very, very big and significant group. For example, in the city of Mariupol, that was all but destroyed in the course of the last two years, the ethnic Russians constituted over 40% of the population, right? So, that’s not exactly part of Donbas, but that gives you general idea.
Now, the story of Donbas and what happened now is multidimensional, and this ethnic composition is just one part of the story. Another very important part of the story is economy, and Donbas is a classical rust belt. And we know what happens with the cities that were part of the first or second wave of industrialization in the United States and globally, we know about social problems that exist in those places. So, Donbas is probably the most dramatic and tragic case of implosion of the rust belt. With the mines not anymore producing the sort of the… And at the acceptable price. The coal that they used to produce, is people losing jobs with the politicians looking for subsidies as opposed to trying very unpopular, unpopular measures of doing something and bring your money and your investment into the region. All of that become part of the story that made it easy for Russia, for the Russian Federation, to destabilize the situation. We have interviews with Mr. Girkin who is saying that he was the first who pulled the trigger and fired the shot in that war. He became the Minister of Defense in the Donetsk people’s republic. You look at the Prime Minister, he is another person with Moscow residency permit. So, you see key figures in those positions at the start and the beginning, not being Russians from Ukraine, but being Russians from Russia and Russians from Moscow closely connected to the government structure and intelligence structure and so on. So, that is the start in the beginning, but the way how it exploded, the way it did was also a combination of the economic and ethno-cultural and linguistic factors.
Lex Fridman
For Putin, the war on Donbas and even in 2022 is a defensive war against what the Ukrainian government is doing against ethnically Russian people in Donbas. Is that fair to say how he describes it?
For Putin, the war on Donbas and even in 2022 is a defensive war against what the Ukrainian government is doing against ethnically Russian people in Donbas. Is that fair to say how he describes it?
Serhii Plokhy
What we see, this is certainly the argument. This is certainly the argument and pretext because what we see there is that there would be no, and there was no independent mobilization in Crimea either, in Crimea or in Donbas, without Russian presence. Without Russian occupation de facto of the Crimea, there would be no… And there was no before, at least in the previous five to six years, any mass mobilizations of Russians. There was none of such mobilizations in Donbas before Girkin and other people with parts of military units showed up there. So, it is an excuse. You’ve been to Ukraine.
What we see, this is certainly the argument. This is certainly the argument and pretext because what we see there is that there would be no, and there was no independent mobilization in Crimea either, in Crimea or in Donbas, without Russian presence. Without Russian occupation de facto of the Crimea, there would be no… And there was no before, at least in the previous five to six years, any mass mobilizations of Russians. There was none of such mobilizations in Donbas before Girkin and other people with parts of military units showed up there. So, it is an excuse. You’ve been to Ukraine.
Lex Fridman
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Serhii Plokhy
You know that Russian language is not persecuted in Ukraine. And if you’ve not been to Donbas or to the Crimea, it would be difficult to find one single Ukrainian school. Not that they didn’t exist at all, but it would take quite an effort for you to find it, or sometimes even to hear Ukrainian language outside of the institutions or the farmer’s market. That’s the reality. That’s the reality that is clear, that is visible. So, imagine under those conditions and context that someone is persecuting ethnic Russians or Russian speakers. One, to believe in something like that, one important precondition is never to step your foot in Ukraine.
You know that Russian language is not persecuted in Ukraine. And if you’ve not been to Donbas or to the Crimea, it would be difficult to find one single Ukrainian school. Not that they didn’t exist at all, but it would take quite an effort for you to find it, or sometimes even to hear Ukrainian language outside of the institutions or the farmer’s market. That’s the reality. That’s the reality that is clear, that is visible. So, imagine under those conditions and context that someone is persecuting ethnic Russians or Russian speakers. One, to believe in something like that, one important precondition is never to step your foot in Ukraine.
Lex Fridman
I should mention, maybe this is a good moment to mention, when I traveled to Ukraine, this is after the start of the war, you mentioned farmer’s market, which is funny. Basically every single person I talked to, including the leadership, we spoke in Russian. For many of them, Russian is the more comfortable language even.
I should mention, maybe this is a good moment to mention, when I traveled to Ukraine, this is after the start of the war, you mentioned farmer’s market, which is funny. Basically every single person I talked to, including the leadership, we spoke in Russian. For many of them, Russian is the more comfortable language even.
And the people who spoke Ukrainian are more on the western side of Ukraine and young people that are kind of wanting to show that in an activist way that they want to fight for the independence of their country. So, I take your point. I wonder if you want to comment about language and maybe about the future of language in Ukraine. Is the future of language going to stabilize on Ukrainian or is it going to return to its traditional base of Russian language?
Serhii Plokhy
Very roughly, before the start of the war in 2014, we can talk about parity between Russian and Ukrainian and also with, as you said, clearly Ukraine being a dominant language in the West and Russian being a dominant language on the streets, certainly in the East of the country. And then in between of that to pause a number of these transitional areas. And Ukraine, in my experience, and I visited a lot of countries, not all of them, and probably maybe I will be still surprised, but in my experience, this is the only truly bilingual country that I ever visited. I lived in Canada for a long period of time. There is Quebec and the rest.
Very roughly, before the start of the war in 2014, we can talk about parity between Russian and Ukrainian and also with, as you said, clearly Ukraine being a dominant language in the West and Russian being a dominant language on the streets, certainly in the East of the country. And then in between of that to pause a number of these transitional areas. And Ukraine, in my experience, and I visited a lot of countries, not all of them, and probably maybe I will be still surprised, but in my experience, this is the only truly bilingual country that I ever visited. I lived in Canada for a long period of time. There is Quebec and the rest.
And in Ukraine, you can talk in either Russian or Ukrainian in any part of the country and you would be understood and you would be responded in a different language with the expectation that you would understand. And if you don’t understand, that means you don’t come from Ukraine. That’s the reality. The war and loss of the Crimea and partial loss of Donbas, its major industrial areas, really shifted the balance toward mostly Ukrainian-speaking regions. And also what you see, and you clearly pointed to that, starting with 2014, even a little bit earlier, the younger generation chooses Ukrainian as a marker of its identity. And that started in 2014, but we have a dramatic, dramatic shift after 2022. And on the-
Serhii Plokhy
… 2022. And on the anecdotal level I can tell you that I speak to people who be in Chernihiv at the time, this is east of Crimea, at the time of the Russian aggression, and bombardment and so on and so forth, who had passive knowledge of Ukrainian but spoke all their life Russian. And they would speak Ukrainian to me, and when I say, “Okay, why you doing that? We know each other for decades and you used Russian.” And he said, “Well, I don’t want to have anything in common with people who did that to us.” So there is a big, big push of course with this current war. Now the question is whether this change is something that will stay or not. What is the future? Linguistic practices are very, very conservative ones. And we at the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute have a project called MAPA Digital Atlas of Ukraine.
… 2022. And on the anecdotal level I can tell you that I speak to people who be in Chernihiv at the time, this is east of Crimea, at the time of the Russian aggression, and bombardment and so on and so forth, who had passive knowledge of Ukrainian but spoke all their life Russian. And they would speak Ukrainian to me, and when I say, “Okay, why you doing that? We know each other for decades and you used Russian.” And he said, “Well, I don’t want to have anything in common with people who did that to us.” So there is a big, big push of course with this current war. Now the question is whether this change is something that will stay or not. What is the future? Linguistic practices are very, very conservative ones. And we at the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute have a project called MAPA Digital Atlas of Ukraine.
And we were documenting and mapping different data in time. And what we noticed a spike in the people’s self-reporting of use of Ukrainian in 2014 and 2015 at the time of the start of the war when the threat was the most clear one. This is self-reporting, that doesn’t mean that people exactly do what they believe that that’s what they’re supposed to do, and then return back to where it was by the year 2016 and 2017. So this dynamic can repeat itself, but given how long the war is going on, how big the impact, how big the stress is, and that the wave of the future is probably associated with younger people who are switching to Ukrainian. So my bet would be on Ukrainian language rising in prominence.
Lex Fridman
So as we get closer to February of 2022, there’s a few other key moments. Maybe let’s talk about in July 2021, Putin publishing an essay titled On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians. Can you describe the ideas expressed in this essay?
So as we get closer to February of 2022, there’s a few other key moments. Maybe let’s talk about in July 2021, Putin publishing an essay titled On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians. Can you describe the ideas expressed in this essay?
Serhii Plokhy
The idea is very conveniently presented already in the first paragraph, in the first sentences really of the article, where Putin says that, “For a long time I was saying that Russians and Ukrainians were one and the same people, and here is the proof.” He develops his historical argumentation apparently with the help of a lot of people around him. And he started to talk about Russians and Ukrainians being one and the same people, one year before the start of the war in 2014. So in 2013, he was together with Patriarch Kirill on visit to Kiev. And there was a conference specifically organized for him in the Kievan Caves Monastery, and that’s where he stated that. The fact that he was with Patriarch Kirill is very important factor for understanding where the idea is coming from.
The idea is very conveniently presented already in the first paragraph, in the first sentences really of the article, where Putin says that, “For a long time I was saying that Russians and Ukrainians were one and the same people, and here is the proof.” He develops his historical argumentation apparently with the help of a lot of people around him. And he started to talk about Russians and Ukrainians being one and the same people, one year before the start of the war in 2014. So in 2013, he was together with Patriarch Kirill on visit to Kiev. And there was a conference specifically organized for him in the Kievan Caves Monastery, and that’s where he stated that. The fact that he was with Patriarch Kirill is very important factor for understanding where the idea is coming from.
This is the idea that was dominant in the Russian Empire of the 19s and the beginning of the 20th century, that Russians, Ukrainians and Belorussians are really, great Russians, little Russians, and white Russians, and that they constitute one people. Yes, there are some dialectical differences. Yes, Ukrainians sing well, yes, they dance funny, but overall that doesn’t matter.
And that idea actually was really destroyed, mostly destroyed by the revolution of 1917. Because it wasn’t just social revolution that’s how it’s understood in the US and good part of the world, it was also national revolution, it was an empire, it was a revolution in the Russian Empire. And to bring this pieces of empire back within the Soviet Union, the Bolsheviks had to make concessions. And one of those concessions was recognition of the existence of Ukrainians as a separate nation, Belorussians as a separate nations, Russians as a separate nations. Endowing them with their own territorial with borders, with institutions and so on and so forth.
But there was one institution that was not reformed, that institution was called the Russian Orthodox Church. Because one of the ways that Bolsheviks dealt with it, they couldn’t eradicate religion completely. But they arrested the development of the religion, and thinking, and theology on the level as it existed before the revolution of 1917. So the Russian Orthodox Church of 1917 continued to be the Russian Orthodox Church in 1991 and in 2013. Continuing the same imperial mantra of the existence of one big Russian nation, one unified people. And when you see the formation of the ideas about nations, about foreign policy in the Russian Empire after 1991, they’re going back to the pre-Bolshevik times.
Ukrainians do that as well. Estonians do that as well. The difference is that when Ukrainians go back, they go back to the pre-1917, they had their intellectual fathers and writings of basically liberal nationalism. Or sometimes they go to the radical nationalism of Bandera, which would be not pre-1917, but pre-1945. When the Russians go to pre-Bolshevik past, looking for the ideas, looking for inspiration, looking for the narratives, what they find there is empire, what they find there are imperial projects. And that’s certainly the story of Putin’s claim, that’s the story of the argument. And to conclude the argument that he lays out there, historical argument, comes also almost directly from the narratives of the late 19s and the beginning of the 20th century. So it’s not only the argument is coming from that era, but also the argumentation is coming from that era as well.
Lex Fridman
But those arguments are all in the flavor of empire.
But those arguments are all in the flavor of empire.
Serhii Plokhy
It’s empire on the one hand, but also there is imperial understanding of what Russian nation is, that doesn’t allow for independence of its little Russian and white Russian branches, alleged branches. So what you see is the concept of the big Russian nation that’s late 19s beginning 20th century. Empire sees the writing on the wall that nationalism is on the rise, and it tries to survive by mobilizing the nationalism of the largest group in the empire, she happens to be Russian. Stalin is a big promoter of some form of Russian nationalism, especially during the war and after war. And he started his career as a very promising Georgian writer, writing in Georgian. So he’s not doing that for some personal affinity or cultural intellectual roots within Russian nation or Russian people. He is doing that for the sake of the success of his Soviet and communist project. And he has to get the largest ethnic group on board, which are Russians. But Stalin and Putin have different understanding who Russians are. Stalin already accepted Ukrainians and Belarusians, their existence Putin goes back to pre-Stalin and pre-Lenin times.
It’s empire on the one hand, but also there is imperial understanding of what Russian nation is, that doesn’t allow for independence of its little Russian and white Russian branches, alleged branches. So what you see is the concept of the big Russian nation that’s late 19s beginning 20th century. Empire sees the writing on the wall that nationalism is on the rise, and it tries to survive by mobilizing the nationalism of the largest group in the empire, she happens to be Russian. Stalin is a big promoter of some form of Russian nationalism, especially during the war and after war. And he started his career as a very promising Georgian writer, writing in Georgian. So he’s not doing that for some personal affinity or cultural intellectual roots within Russian nation or Russian people. He is doing that for the sake of the success of his Soviet and communist project. And he has to get the largest ethnic group on board, which are Russians. But Stalin and Putin have different understanding who Russians are. Stalin already accepted Ukrainians and Belarusians, their existence Putin goes back to pre-Stalin and pre-Lenin times.
Lex Fridman
So if we step back from the historical context of this and maybe the geopolitical purpose of writing such an essay, and forget about the essay altogether. I have family in Ukraine and Russia. I know a lot of people in Ukraine and Russia. Forget the war, forget all of this, they all sound the same. If I go to France, they sound different than in Ukraine and Russia. If you lay out the cultural map of the world, there’s just a different beat, and music, and flavor to a people. What I’m trying to say is there seems to be a closeness between the cultures of Ukraine and Russia. How do we describe that? Do we acknowledge that and how does that add tension with the national independence?
So if we step back from the historical context of this and maybe the geopolitical purpose of writing such an essay, and forget about the essay altogether. I have family in Ukraine and Russia. I know a lot of people in Ukraine and Russia. Forget the war, forget all of this, they all sound the same. If I go to France, they sound different than in Ukraine and Russia. If you lay out the cultural map of the world, there’s just a different beat, and music, and flavor to a people. What I’m trying to say is there seems to be a closeness between the cultures of Ukraine and Russia. How do we describe that? Do we acknowledge that and how does that add tension with the national independence?
Serhii Plokhy
First of all, especially when it comes to Eastern Ukraine or to big cities, many people in Ukraine spoke Russian. Generally, it’s the same language. On the top of that we started our discussion with talking about the Slavs, so both Ukrainian and Russian language are Slavic languages, so there is proximity there as well.
First of all, especially when it comes to Eastern Ukraine or to big cities, many people in Ukraine spoke Russian. Generally, it’s the same language. On the top of that we started our discussion with talking about the Slavs, so both Ukrainian and Russian language are Slavic languages, so there is proximity there as well.
On the top of that, there is a history of existence in the Soviet Union, and before that in one empire for a long period of time. So you see a lot of before the war, a lot of Ukrainian singers and entertainers performing in Russia and vice versa. And biography of President Zelensky certainly fits that particular model as well, that all talks about similarities. But this similarities also very often obscure things that became so important in the course of this war. And I already mentioned the book titled by President Kuchma of Ukraine, Ukraine is Not Russia. So that’s the argument, despite the fact that you think that we are the same, we behave differently. And it turned out that they behave differently. You have Bolotnaya in Moscow and police violence, and that’s the end of it. You have the Maidan in Ukraine and you have police violence, and that’s the beginning, that’s not the end. History really matters in the way why sometimes people speaking the same language with different accents behave very differently.
Russia and Russian identity was formed around the state, and has difficulty imagining itself outside of the state, and that state happened to be imperial for most of Russian history. Ukrainian project came into existence in revolt against the state. Ukraine came into existence out of the parts of different empires, which means they left different cultural impact on them. And for Ukrainians to stay together, autocratic regime so far didn’t work. It’s like the colonies of the United States. You have to find common language, you have to talk to each other. And that became part of the Ukrainian political DNA. And that became a huge factor in the war.
And very few people in Ukraine believed what Vladimir Putin was saying that Russians and Ukrainians were one and the same people, but the majority believed that they’re certainly close culturally and historically nations. And from that point of view the bombardment of the Ukrainian cities became such a shock to the Ukrainians. Because deep down they maybe looked at Syria, they looked at Chechnya, and were explaining that through the fact that there was basically such a big cultural gap and difference between Russians and those countries and those nations. But my understanding at least, most of them had difficulty imagining the war of that proportion and that ferocity, and bring that war crimes and on that level.
Lex Fridman
It’s interesting you say that in the DNA of Ukraine versus Russia. So maybe Russia is more conducive to authoritarian regimes, and Ukraine is more conducive to defining itself by rebelling against authoritarian regimes.
It’s interesting you say that in the DNA of Ukraine versus Russia. So maybe Russia is more conducive to authoritarian regimes, and Ukraine is more conducive to defining itself by rebelling against authoritarian regimes.
Serhii Plokhy
By rebellion, absolutely, and that was the story pretty much before 1991. So what you see since 1991 and what you see today is I would say new factor, certainly in Ukrainian modern history. Because Ukrainians traditionally were very successful rebels. The largest peasant army in the Civil War in the Russian Empire was the Makhno army in Southern Ukraine. And one revolt, Cossack revolts and other revolts, one after another. But Ukrainians had historically difficulty actually maintaining the freedom that they acquired, had difficulty associating themselves with the state. And what we see, especially in the last two years, it’s a quite phenomenal development in Ukraine when Ukrainians associate themselves with the state. Where Ukrainians see a state not just as a foreigner, as historically it was in Ukrainian history.
By rebellion, absolutely, and that was the story pretty much before 1991. So what you see since 1991 and what you see today is I would say new factor, certainly in Ukrainian modern history. Because Ukrainians traditionally were very successful rebels. The largest peasant army in the Civil War in the Russian Empire was the Makhno army in Southern Ukraine. And one revolt, Cossack revolts and other revolts, one after another. But Ukrainians had historically difficulty actually maintaining the freedom that they acquired, had difficulty associating themselves with the state. And what we see, especially in the last two years, it’s a quite phenomenal development in Ukraine when Ukrainians associate themselves with the state. Where Ukrainians see a state not just as a foreigner, as historically it was in Ukrainian history.
Not just someone who came to take, but the state that is continuation of them, that helps to provide security for them. That the Ukrainian armed forces even before the start of this war had the highest support and popularity in Ukraine. The state today functions unbelievably effectively under attacks and missile attacks, and against city government and local government. And we are witnessing when it comes to Ukraine, we’re witnessing a very important historical development where Ukrainians found their state for the first time through most of their history, and try to make a transition from successful rebels to successful managers and state builders.
NATO and Russia
Lex Fridman
I talked to John Mearsheimer recently, there’s a lot of people that believe NATO had a big contribution to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. So what role did NATO play in this full history from Bucharest in 2008 to today?
I talked to John Mearsheimer recently, there’s a lot of people that believe NATO had a big contribution to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. So what role did NATO play in this full history from Bucharest in 2008 to today?
Serhii Plokhy
NATO was a big part certainly of the Russian justification for the war, that was the theme that was up there in the months leading to the aggression. The truth is that, and Vladimir Putin went on records saying that, that the Western leaders were telling him again and again that there is no chance for Ukraine to become member of NATO anytime soon. Russia was very effective back in the year two ’08 in stopping Ukraine and Georgia on the path of joining NATO. There was a Bucharest Summit at which the US president at that time, George W. Bush was pushing for the membership. And Putin convinced leaders of France and Germany to block that membership. And after that membership for Ukraine and for Georgia was really removed from the realistic agenda for NATO. And that’s what the leaders of the western world in the month leading into the February 2022 aggression were trying to convey to Vladimir Putin.
NATO was a big part certainly of the Russian justification for the war, that was the theme that was up there in the months leading to the aggression. The truth is that, and Vladimir Putin went on records saying that, that the Western leaders were telling him again and again that there is no chance for Ukraine to become member of NATO anytime soon. Russia was very effective back in the year two ’08 in stopping Ukraine and Georgia on the path of joining NATO. There was a Bucharest Summit at which the US president at that time, George W. Bush was pushing for the membership. And Putin convinced leaders of France and Germany to block that membership. And after that membership for Ukraine and for Georgia was really removed from the realistic agenda for NATO. And that’s what the leaders of the western world in the month leading into the February 2022 aggression were trying to convey to Vladimir Putin.
What he wanted there was an ultimatum that really was there not to start negotiations, but really to stop negotiations. He demanded the withdrawal of NATO to the borders of the 1997, if I’m not mistaken. So completely something that neither leaders would accept, nor the country’s members of NATO would accept. But for me, it’s very clear that that was an excuse, that that was a justification.
And what happened later in the year 2022 and 2023 certainly confirms me in that belief. Finland joined NATO and Sweden is on the way to joining NATO. So Finland joining NATO, increased border between Russia and NATO, twofold, and probably more than that. So if NATO is the real concern, it would be probably not completely unreasonable to expect that if not every single soldier, but at least half of the Russian army fighting in Ukraine would be moved to protect the new border with NATO in Finland.
So I have no doubt that no one in Kremlin either in the past or today looks favorably or is excited about NATO moving, or the countries of Eastern Europe journey NATO. But I have very difficult time imagining that that was the primary cause of the war. And what we see also we talked about Tucker’s interview, he was surprised, but he believed that Putin was completely honest when the first 25 minutes of interview he was talking about relations between Russia and Ukraine, was talking about history. And that was also the main focus of his essay. Essay was not on NATO and Russia, his essay was on Russia and Ukraine. So that is where the real causes are. The broader context is the fall of empire and process of disintegration of empire, not the story of NATO.
Lex Fridman
What was to clarify the reason Putin, Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022?
What was to clarify the reason Putin, Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022?
Serhii Plokhy
The immediate goal in 2014 when the war started was to stop the drift of Ukraine toward the west and outside of the Russian sphere of influence. The invasion of 2022 perceived the same goals, keeping Ukraine in the Russian sphere of influence. Once we have the resistance, quite effective resistance on the part of Ukraine, the Rammstein and coalition, international coalition in support of Ukraine. Then we see the realization of plan B, where parts of Ukrainian territory are being annexed and included in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. So the two scenarios don’t exclude each other, but if scenario number one doesn’t work, then scenario number two goes into play.
The immediate goal in 2014 when the war started was to stop the drift of Ukraine toward the west and outside of the Russian sphere of influence. The invasion of 2022 perceived the same goals, keeping Ukraine in the Russian sphere of influence. Once we have the resistance, quite effective resistance on the part of Ukraine, the Rammstein and coalition, international coalition in support of Ukraine. Then we see the realization of plan B, where parts of Ukrainian territory are being annexed and included in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. So the two scenarios don’t exclude each other, but if scenario number one doesn’t work, then scenario number two goes into play.
Lex Fridman
In the Gates of Kiev chapter, you write about Volodymyr Zelensky in the early days of the war. What are most important moments to you about this time? The first hours and days of the invasion.
In the Gates of Kiev chapter, you write about Volodymyr Zelensky in the early days of the war. What are most important moments to you about this time? The first hours and days of the invasion.
Serhii Plokhy
The first hours and the first days were the most difficult, psychologically. The rest of the world really didn’t expect Kiev to last for more than few days. Didn’t expect Ukraine to last for more than few weeks. And all the data suggested that that’s what would happen. Ukraine would collapse, would be taken over. Putin called his war a special military operation, which suggests your also expectations about the scope, expectations about the time. So semi-military, semi police operation. So every reasonable person in the world believed that that would happen. And it’s the heroism of “unreasonable” people like Zelensky, like the commander of Ukrainian Armed forces, Zoluzhny, like mayors of the cities, Klitschko and others. I’m just naming names that are familiar to almost all of us now. But there are thousands of those people, unreasonable people who decided that it was unreasonable to attack their country.
The first hours and the first days were the most difficult, psychologically. The rest of the world really didn’t expect Kiev to last for more than few days. Didn’t expect Ukraine to last for more than few weeks. And all the data suggested that that’s what would happen. Ukraine would collapse, would be taken over. Putin called his war a special military operation, which suggests your also expectations about the scope, expectations about the time. So semi-military, semi police operation. So every reasonable person in the world believed that that would happen. And it’s the heroism of “unreasonable” people like Zelensky, like the commander of Ukrainian Armed forces, Zoluzhny, like mayors of the cities, Klitschko and others. I’m just naming names that are familiar to almost all of us now. But there are thousands of those people, unreasonable people who decided that it was unreasonable to attack their country.
And that was the most difficult times and days. And speaking about Zelensky, every I understand reasonable leader in the West was trying to convince him to leave Ukraine and to set a government in exile in Poland or in London. And it was reasonable to accept one of his predecessors Mr. Yanukovych fled Kiev. A few months before that in Afghanistan, the president of Afghanistan fled Afghanistan. That was a reasonable thing to expect, and he turned out to be very, very unreasonable in that sense. That comes with the guts, his guts and guts people around him and Ukrainians in general.
Lex Fridman
Why do you think he stayed in Kiev, this former comedian who played a president on TV, when Kiev is being invaded by the second most powerful military in the world?
Why do you think he stayed in Kiev, this former comedian who played a president on TV, when Kiev is being invaded by the second most powerful military in the world?
Serhii Plokhy
Because I think he believes in things. One of those things was that if he a president and he is in the presidential office, he is there to play his role to the end. And another thing, my personal, again, I never met Volodymyr Zelensky. My personal understanding of him is that he has talent that helped him in his career before the presidency and then helps now. He feels the audience, and then channels the attitude of the audience and amplifies it. And I think that another reason why he didn’t leave Kiev was that he felt the audience, the audience in that particular context for the Ukrainians.
Because I think he believes in things. One of those things was that if he a president and he is in the presidential office, he is there to play his role to the end. And another thing, my personal, again, I never met Volodymyr Zelensky. My personal understanding of him is that he has talent that helped him in his career before the presidency and then helps now. He feels the audience, and then channels the attitude of the audience and amplifies it. And I think that another reason why he didn’t leave Kiev was that he felt the audience, the audience in that particular context for the Ukrainians.
Lex Fridman
So he had a sense that the Ukrainians would unify. Because he was quite if you look at the polls before the war, quite unpopular. And there was still divisions and factions, and the government is divided, there’s the East and the West and all this stuff. You think he had a sense that this could unite people.
So he had a sense that the Ukrainians would unify. Because he was quite if you look at the polls before the war, quite unpopular. And there was still divisions and factions, and the government is divided, there’s the East and the West and all this stuff. You think he had a sense that this could unite people.
Serhii Plokhy
The East and the West was not already such an issue after Crimea and part of Donbas being gone. So Ukraine was much more united than it was before. He brought to power his before that really non-existent party of regions on his personal popularity. But the important thing is that he created a majority in the parliament, which really reflected the unity that existed among Ukrainians that was not there before. He won with 73% of the population of those who took part in the elections, his predecessor Petro Poroshenko also carried 90% of the precincts. And the same happened with Zelensky. So the country unified after 2014, to a degree it was impossible to imagine before. And Zelensky felt that Zelensky knew that, and that’s where the talent of politician really matters. That’s something that you can see beyond just data, and you can feel that apparently Yeltsin had that ability.
The East and the West was not already such an issue after Crimea and part of Donbas being gone. So Ukraine was much more united than it was before. He brought to power his before that really non-existent party of regions on his personal popularity. But the important thing is that he created a majority in the parliament, which really reflected the unity that existed among Ukrainians that was not there before. He won with 73% of the population of those who took part in the elections, his predecessor Petro Poroshenko also carried 90% of the precincts. And the same happened with Zelensky. So the country unified after 2014, to a degree it was impossible to imagine before. And Zelensky felt that Zelensky knew that, and that’s where the talent of politician really matters. That’s something that you can see beyond just data, and you can feel that apparently Yeltsin had that ability.
Peace talks
Lex Fridman
Why did the peace talks fail? There was a lot of peace talks.
Why did the peace talks fail? There was a lot of peace talks.
Serhii Plokhy
The main reason is that the conditions that Russia was trying to impose on Ukraine were basically unacceptable for Ukraine. Because one of the conditions apart from this strange thing called Denazification, was of course de facto loss of the territory. And for the future, really staying outside either of NATO or any Western support, which was very clear. You can buy a couple of weeks, you can buy a couple of months, but in the conditions like that Russia will come back tomorrow and will take over everything.
The main reason is that the conditions that Russia was trying to impose on Ukraine were basically unacceptable for Ukraine. Because one of the conditions apart from this strange thing called Denazification, was of course de facto loss of the territory. And for the future, really staying outside either of NATO or any Western support, which was very clear. You can buy a couple of weeks, you can buy a couple of months, but in the conditions like that Russia will come back tomorrow and will take over everything.
And once Ukrainians realize that they can win on the battlefield, once the Russians were defeated and withdrew from Kiev, the opportunity emerged to get out of the negotiations, which was very clear were leading, if not today then tomorrow to the complete destruction of Ukraine. And then of course, once the territory started to be liberated, things like butcher and massacres of the civilian population came to the fore, which made also very difficult, if not impossible to conduct negotiations from this moral and emotional point of view.
Lex Fridman
What about the claims that Boris Johnson, the West compromised the ability of these peace talks to be successful, basically manipulated the talks?
What about the claims that Boris Johnson, the West compromised the ability of these peace talks to be successful, basically manipulated the talks?
Serhii Plokhy
I asked people who accompanied Boris Johnson to Kiev that question, the answer was no. And I believe this answer, and I’ll tell you why. Because it is very difficult for me to imagine President Zelensky to take orders from anybody in the world. Either whether it is Johnson or Joe Biden or anybody else, and basically doing things that Zelensky believes are not in his interest or in the interest of his country. I just can’t imagine that anybody in the world telling Zelensky what to do, and Zelensky actually following it against his own wishes and desires. At least if that is possible, what is in the public’s sphere doesn’t allow us to suggest that it is.
I asked people who accompanied Boris Johnson to Kiev that question, the answer was no. And I believe this answer, and I’ll tell you why. Because it is very difficult for me to imagine President Zelensky to take orders from anybody in the world. Either whether it is Johnson or Joe Biden or anybody else, and basically doing things that Zelensky believes are not in his interest or in the interest of his country. I just can’t imagine that anybody in the world telling Zelensky what to do, and Zelensky actually following it against his own wishes and desires. At least if that is possible, what is in the public’s sphere doesn’t allow us to suggest that it is.
Lex Fridman
That said, Zelensky is a smart man and he knows that the war can only continue with the West’s support.
That said, Zelensky is a smart man and he knows that the war can only continue with the West’s support.
Serhii Plokhy
That is a different supposition to know that it can continue with the West’s support. But if talking about withdrawing from the negotiations, that’s not about the continuation of the war, that you don’t need Western support.
That is a different supposition to know that it can continue with the West’s support. But if talking about withdrawing from the negotiations, that’s not about the continuation of the war, that you don’t need Western support.
Lex Fridman
Well, what I mean is if he started to sense that the West will support no matter what, then maybe the space of decisions you’re making is different.
Well, what I mean is if he started to sense that the West will support no matter what, then maybe the space of decisions you’re making is different.
Serhii Plokhy
We can interpret that that way. But Boris Johnson represented at that point Britain, not the United States. And really what the war showed, and it was clear already at that time that what was needed was massive support from the West as a whole. And the promise of that support came only after the West realized that Ukraine can win, and came only in late April is the Rammstein, so at least a few weeks later. So I don’t know how much Boris Johnson could promise, he probably could promise to try to help and try to convince and try to work on that. If Zelensky acted on that promise he certainly was taking a risk. But the key issue, again, I’m going back where I started, it’s principle unacceptance for Ukraine the conditions that were offered. And Ukraine was the moment they saw the possibility that they could fight back with Johnson’s support, without Johnson’s support they took the chance.
We can interpret that that way. But Boris Johnson represented at that point Britain, not the United States. And really what the war showed, and it was clear already at that time that what was needed was massive support from the West as a whole. And the promise of that support came only after the West realized that Ukraine can win, and came only in late April is the Rammstein, so at least a few weeks later. So I don’t know how much Boris Johnson could promise, he probably could promise to try to help and try to convince and try to work on that. If Zelensky acted on that promise he certainly was taking a risk. But the key issue, again, I’m going back where I started, it’s principle unacceptance for Ukraine the conditions that were offered. And Ukraine was the moment they saw the possibility that they could fight back with Johnson’s support, without Johnson’s support they took the chance.
Lex Fridman
So what are the ways this war can end, do you think? What are the different possible trajectories, whether it’s peace talks? What does winning look like for you this side? What is the role of US? What trajectories do you see that are possible?
So what are the ways this war can end, do you think? What are the different possible trajectories, whether it’s peace talks? What does winning look like for you this side? What is the role of US? What trajectories do you see that are possible?
Serhii Plokhy
It’s a question on the one level very easy to answer, on the other very difficult. The level on which it is very easy, it’s a broad historical perspective. If you really believe, and I believe in that, that this is the war of the Soviet succession, that this is the war of the disintegration of empire. We know how the story ends, and they end with disintegration of empire. They end with the rise of the new states and appearance of the new colored spots on the map. That’s the story that started with the American Revolution, so that’s long-term perspective. The difficult part is of course what will happen tomorrow. The difficult part is what they will be in two days or even in two years. In very broad terms, the war can end in one of three scenarios.
It’s a question on the one level very easy to answer, on the other very difficult. The level on which it is very easy, it’s a broad historical perspective. If you really believe, and I believe in that, that this is the war of the Soviet succession, that this is the war of the disintegration of empire. We know how the story ends, and they end with disintegration of empire. They end with the rise of the new states and appearance of the new colored spots on the map. That’s the story that started with the American Revolution, so that’s long-term perspective. The difficult part is of course what will happen tomorrow. The difficult part is what they will be in two days or even in two years. In very broad terms, the war can end in one of three scenarios.
The victory of one side, the victory of another side, and a sort of stalemate and compromise, especially when it comes to the territories. This war is already approaching the end of the second year. I follow the news and look analysis. I don’t remember one single piece suggesting that the next year will bring peace or will bring-
Serhii Plokhy
Suggesting that the next year will bring peace for sure, and we are in a situation where both sides still believe that they can achieve something or improve their position on the battlefield. Certainly that was the expectations of Ukrainian side back in the summer and early fall of 2023, and from what I understand now, this is certainly the expectations of the Russian side today. This is the largest war in Europe since World War II, the largest war in the world since Korean War. And we know that the Korean war ended in this division of Korea, but the negotiations were going on for more than two years. While those negotiations were going on, both sides were trying to improve their position there. And until there was a political change, death of Stalin, rival of Eisenhower in the United States, and the realization that the chances of succeeding on the battlefield are huge, the peace talks didn’t come. So at this point, all three scenarios are possible. I don’t really discount any of them. It’s early to say what will happen.
Suggesting that the next year will bring peace for sure, and we are in a situation where both sides still believe that they can achieve something or improve their position on the battlefield. Certainly that was the expectations of Ukrainian side back in the summer and early fall of 2023, and from what I understand now, this is certainly the expectations of the Russian side today. This is the largest war in Europe since World War II, the largest war in the world since Korean War. And we know that the Korean war ended in this division of Korea, but the negotiations were going on for more than two years. While those negotiations were going on, both sides were trying to improve their position there. And until there was a political change, death of Stalin, rival of Eisenhower in the United States, and the realization that the chances of succeeding on the battlefield are huge, the peace talks didn’t come. So at this point, all three scenarios are possible. I don’t really discount any of them. It’s early to say what will happen.
Lex Fridman
So without any political change, let’s try to imagine what are the possibilities that the war ends this year? Is it possible that it can end with compromise basically at the place it started?
So without any political change, let’s try to imagine what are the possibilities that the war ends this year? Is it possible that it can end with compromise basically at the place it started?
Serhii Plokhy
Meaning back to the borders of 2022.
Meaning back to the borders of 2022.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Back to the borders of ’22, with some security guarantees that aren’t really guarantees, but are hopeful guarantees.
Yeah. Back to the borders of ’22, with some security guarantees that aren’t really guarantees, but are hopeful guarantees.
Serhii Plokhy
No, it’s not just virtual impossibility, it is impossible without political change in Moscow. The reason is that back in the fall of 2022, Vladimir Putin included five of Ukrainian regions, oblasts, even those that he didn’t control or didn’t control fully into the Russian constitution, which basically in simple language is that the hands are tied up not only for Putin himself, but also for his possible successors. So that means that no return to the borders of 2022 without political change in Moscow are possible. A few days after that decision in Moscow, Zelensky issued a decree saying that no negotiations with Russia. What that really meant in plain language is that basically, we’re not prepared to negotiate a stable agreement with five oblasts, not just the next, but also included into the Russian constitution. So that’s where we are, so that scenario, again, everything is possible of course, but it’s highly, highly unlikely.
No, it’s not just virtual impossibility, it is impossible without political change in Moscow. The reason is that back in the fall of 2022, Vladimir Putin included five of Ukrainian regions, oblasts, even those that he didn’t control or didn’t control fully into the Russian constitution, which basically in simple language is that the hands are tied up not only for Putin himself, but also for his possible successors. So that means that no return to the borders of 2022 without political change in Moscow are possible. A few days after that decision in Moscow, Zelensky issued a decree saying that no negotiations with Russia. What that really meant in plain language is that basically, we’re not prepared to negotiate a stable agreement with five oblasts, not just the next, but also included into the Russian constitution. So that’s where we are, so that scenario, again, everything is possible of course, but it’s highly, highly unlikely.
Lex Fridman
So the Russian constitution is a thing that makes this all very difficult.
So the Russian constitution is a thing that makes this all very difficult.
Serhii Plokhy
Yes, and not only as a negotiation tactic for Putin or whoever would negotiate on the Russian side, but also as a legal issue.
Yes, and not only as a negotiation tactic for Putin or whoever would negotiate on the Russian side, but also as a legal issue.
Lex Fridman
So the practical aspect of it even is difficult.
So the practical aspect of it even is difficult.
Serhii Plokhy
Yes. You really have to change the Constitution before the peace agreement takes hold or immediately after that. And with the Minsk agreements, that was one of things that Russia wanted from Ukraine, change of the Constitution, and it turned out to be rarely impossible. So that’s one of the backstories of the Minsk and collapse of the Minsk agreements.
Yes. You really have to change the Constitution before the peace agreement takes hold or immediately after that. And with the Minsk agreements, that was one of things that Russia wanted from Ukraine, change of the Constitution, and it turned out to be rarely impossible. So that’s one of the backstories of the Minsk and collapse of the Minsk agreements.
Lex Fridman
Is there something like Minsk agreements that are possible now, maybe this is a legal question, but to override the Constitution to sort of shake everything up? So see the constitutional amendment as just a negotiation tactic to come to the table to something like Minsk agreement?
Is there something like Minsk agreements that are possible now, maybe this is a legal question, but to override the Constitution to sort of shake everything up? So see the constitutional amendment as just a negotiation tactic to come to the table to something like Minsk agreement?
Serhii Plokhy
Given how fast those amendments to the Constitution were adopted, that suggests that really, executive power in Russia has enormous power over the legislative branch. So it’s again difficult to imagine, but technically this is possible, again, but possible if there is a political change in Moscow.
Given how fast those amendments to the Constitution were adopted, that suggests that really, executive power in Russia has enormous power over the legislative branch. So it’s again difficult to imagine, but technically this is possible, again, but possible if there is a political change in Moscow.
Lex Fridman
I don’t understand why assuming political change in Moscow is not possible this year, so I’m trying to see if there’s a way to end this war this year. Right?
I don’t understand why assuming political change in Moscow is not possible this year, so I’m trying to see if there’s a way to end this war this year. Right?
Serhii Plokhy
There is a possibility of armistice, right? But armistice more like any armistice, along the lines of the current front lines. But withdrawal of the Russian troops to the borders of 2022 at this point, whether it’s reasonable or unreasonable, can be achieved all only as the result of the defeat of the Russian army like it happened near Kiev. Is it possible? Possible. Is it likely, especially given what is happening with the Western support, military support for Ukraine? Probably not.
There is a possibility of armistice, right? But armistice more like any armistice, along the lines of the current front lines. But withdrawal of the Russian troops to the borders of 2022 at this point, whether it’s reasonable or unreasonable, can be achieved all only as the result of the defeat of the Russian army like it happened near Kiev. Is it possible? Possible. Is it likely, especially given what is happening with the Western support, military support for Ukraine? Probably not.
Lex Fridman
But if Putin, the executive branch has a lot of power, why can’t the United States president, the Russian president, the Ukrainian president come to the table and drop something like Minsk agreements, and then rapid constitutional changes made and you go back to the borders of before 2022? Through agreements, through compromise, impossible for you?
But if Putin, the executive branch has a lot of power, why can’t the United States president, the Russian president, the Ukrainian president come to the table and drop something like Minsk agreements, and then rapid constitutional changes made and you go back to the borders of before 2022? Through agreements, through compromise, impossible for you?
Serhii Plokhy
Certainly not this year. I look at this year as the time when at least one side, Russian side, will try to get as much as it can through military means.
Certainly not this year. I look at this year as the time when at least one side, Russian side, will try to get as much as it can through military means.
Lex Fridman
But that’s been happening last year too. There’s been a counteroffensive, there’s attempts.
But that’s been happening last year too. There’s been a counteroffensive, there’s attempts.
Serhii Plokhy
It doesn’t mean that new year somehow is supposed to bring new tactics. The last year was pretty much a lot of fighting, a lot of suffering, very little movement of the front line. The biggest change of the last year was Ukraine victory on the Black Sea, where they pushed the Russian Navy into the western part of the pond and restored the grain corridor and export from Odessa, apparently up to 75% of what it used to be before the war. So that’s the only major change but again, the price is enormous in terms of wealth, especially in terms of lives.
It doesn’t mean that new year somehow is supposed to bring new tactics. The last year was pretty much a lot of fighting, a lot of suffering, very little movement of the front line. The biggest change of the last year was Ukraine victory on the Black Sea, where they pushed the Russian Navy into the western part of the pond and restored the grain corridor and export from Odessa, apparently up to 75% of what it used to be before the war. So that’s the only major change but again, the price is enormous in terms of wealth, especially in terms of lives.
Ukrainian Army head Valerii Zaluzhnyi
Lex Fridman
So thinking about what 2024 brings, Zelensky just fired Ukraine’s head of the army, a man you’ve mentioned, General Valery Zaluzhny. What do you make of this development?
So thinking about what 2024 brings, Zelensky just fired Ukraine’s head of the army, a man you’ve mentioned, General Valery Zaluzhny. What do you make of this development?
Serhii Plokhy
This is a very, very dangerous moment in the war. The reason for that is that Zaluzhny is someone who is very popular with the army and we people in general. So if you look at that through American prism, that would be something analogous to President Truman firing General MacArthur, given that stakes for U.S at that time were very high, but probably not as high as they’re for Ukraine today. In both cases, what is at stake is certainly the idea that the political leadership and military leadership have to be on the same page.
This is a very, very dangerous moment in the war. The reason for that is that Zaluzhny is someone who is very popular with the army and we people in general. So if you look at that through American prism, that would be something analogous to President Truman firing General MacArthur, given that stakes for U.S at that time were very high, but probably not as high as they’re for Ukraine today. In both cases, what is at stake is certainly the idea that the political leadership and military leadership have to be on the same page.
And the question is whether on the part of Zelensky, this is just the change of the leadership or this is also the change of his approach to the war, and that can mean many things. One, can mean him taking more active part in planning operations. It can mean also possible change of the tactic in the war, given that counteroffensive didn’t work out. We don’t know yet. I don’t know whether President Zelensky at this point knows exactly what will come next, but this is the time when the change of the leadership in the country and in the army that is at war, it’s one of the most trying, most dangerous moments.
Lex Fridman
So the thing that President Zelensky expressed is that this is going to be a change of tactics, making the approach more technologically advanced, those kind of things. But as you said, I believe he is less popular than the chief of the army, Zaluzhny, 80% to 60% depending on the polls. Do you think it’s possible that Zelensky’s days are numbered as the president and that somebody like Zaluzhny comes to power?
So the thing that President Zelensky expressed is that this is going to be a change of tactics, making the approach more technologically advanced, those kind of things. But as you said, I believe he is less popular than the chief of the army, Zaluzhny, 80% to 60% depending on the polls. Do you think it’s possible that Zelensky’s days are numbered as the president and that somebody like Zaluzhny comes to power?
Serhii Plokhy
What we know is that in this war, Ukrainian people really united around their president and the armed forces were always, even before the start of the war, more popular than was the presidential office., so the change that happened in that realm was not so dramatic. And from what I can see from social media in Ukraine, there is a lot of unhappiness, a lot of questions, but there is also realization, and very strong realization, that the country has to stay united. And certainly the behavior of Zaluzhny himself is there basically not suggesting any sort of a Prigozhin type of scenario. That gives me some hope, actually a lot of hope.
What we know is that in this war, Ukrainian people really united around their president and the armed forces were always, even before the start of the war, more popular than was the presidential office., so the change that happened in that realm was not so dramatic. And from what I can see from social media in Ukraine, there is a lot of unhappiness, a lot of questions, but there is also realization, and very strong realization, that the country has to stay united. And certainly the behavior of Zaluzhny himself is there basically not suggesting any sort of a Prigozhin type of scenario. That gives me some hope, actually a lot of hope.
And in terms of whether Zelensky’s days are numbered or not, I don’t think they’re numbered, but if Ukraine stays a democracy, and I believe it’ll stay, what comes to my mind is the story of Churchill, the story of de Gaulle. In Poland, the story of Pilsudski. So once the war is over, really the electorate in the Democratic elections, they want to change the political leadership, they want to move forward. But Pilsudski came back to power, and de Gaulle came back to power, and Churchill came back to power. So no, whatever happens in the short run or medium term run, I think that Zelensky’s days in politics are not numbered.
Lex Fridman
So what to you is interesting? For example, if I get a chance to interview Zelensky, what to you is interesting about the person that would be good to ask about, to explore about, the state of his mind, his thinking, his view of the world as it stands today?
So what to you is interesting? For example, if I get a chance to interview Zelensky, what to you is interesting about the person that would be good to ask about, to explore about, the state of his mind, his thinking, his view of the world as it stands today?
Serhii Plokhy
Next month we’re supposed to take place Ukrainian elections. They’re not taking place because the majority of Ukrainians don’t think this is the right thing to do, to change the president, to have the elections, to have a political struggle in the middle of the war. So Zelensky refused to call those elections, despite the fact that he is and continues to be the most popular politician in Ukraine. So it would be to his benefit, but that’s clearly not what the Ukrainians want. But the question of continuing as the president beyond five years also one way or another would raise questions about the legitimacy, and certainly Russia will be playing this card like there is no tomorrow. What I would be interested in asking Zelensky about, whether he sees that his second term, which comes on those conditions, would suggest a different attitude toward the opposition. Maybe some form of the coalition government, like it was the case in Britain with Churchill, under different circumstances of course, or this is basically, in his opinion, something that would be destructive and something that would really be an impediment for the issue, for the question of unity and war effort. And I would ask this question not to basically suggest that that’s the way to go, but I would be very much interested to hear what is his thinking about that is.
Next month we’re supposed to take place Ukrainian elections. They’re not taking place because the majority of Ukrainians don’t think this is the right thing to do, to change the president, to have the elections, to have a political struggle in the middle of the war. So Zelensky refused to call those elections, despite the fact that he is and continues to be the most popular politician in Ukraine. So it would be to his benefit, but that’s clearly not what the Ukrainians want. But the question of continuing as the president beyond five years also one way or another would raise questions about the legitimacy, and certainly Russia will be playing this card like there is no tomorrow. What I would be interested in asking Zelensky about, whether he sees that his second term, which comes on those conditions, would suggest a different attitude toward the opposition. Maybe some form of the coalition government, like it was the case in Britain with Churchill, under different circumstances of course, or this is basically, in his opinion, something that would be destructive and something that would really be an impediment for the issue, for the question of unity and war effort. And I would ask this question not to basically suggest that that’s the way to go, but I would be very much interested to hear what is his thinking about that is.
Power and War
Lex Fridman
Do you think there’s a degree during wartime that the power that comes with being a war president can corrupt the person, sort of push you away from the democratic mindset towards an authoritarian one?
Do you think there’s a degree during wartime that the power that comes with being a war president can corrupt the person, sort of push you away from the democratic mindset towards an authoritarian one?
Serhii Plokhy
I think that there is a possibility of that, right? In the conditions of any emergency, a war, in the case of the Soviet Union, there was a Chernobyl disaster and so on and so forth, you make decisions much faster. You create this vertical and then it’s very easy to get really used to that way dealing with the conditions of emergency. And in continuing emergency or with no emergency, they’re continuing the emergency mode. I think again, that would be a very, very natural thing for any human being to do to make it easier. Should I do that easier and in more effective way, or should I do the right way? That’s the challenge. Sometimes it’s difficult to answer this question.
I think that there is a possibility of that, right? In the conditions of any emergency, a war, in the case of the Soviet Union, there was a Chernobyl disaster and so on and so forth, you make decisions much faster. You create this vertical and then it’s very easy to get really used to that way dealing with the conditions of emergency. And in continuing emergency or with no emergency, they’re continuing the emergency mode. I think again, that would be a very, very natural thing for any human being to do to make it easier. Should I do that easier and in more effective way, or should I do the right way? That’s the challenge. Sometimes it’s difficult to answer this question.
Lex Fridman
Let me stay in power for just a little longer to do it the efficient way, and then time flies away and all of a sudden you’re going for the third term and the fourth term.
Let me stay in power for just a little longer to do it the efficient way, and then time flies away and all of a sudden you’re going for the third term and the fourth term.
Serhii Plokhy
And suddenly it’s easy to realize that actually, you can’t control in any other way. Whatever skills you had or people around that can help, is that already gone?
And suddenly it’s easy to realize that actually, you can’t control in any other way. Whatever skills you had or people around that can help, is that already gone?
Lex Fridman
Exactly. The people that surround you are not providing the kind of critical feedback necessary for democratic system. One of the things that Tucker said after his interview with Putin, he was just in his hotel just chatting on video, and he said that he felt like Putin was not very good at explaining himself, like a coherent, whole narrative of why the invasion happened or just this big picture. And he said that’s not because he doesn’t have one, but it’s been a long time since he’s had somebody around him where he has to explain himself to so he’s out of practice, which is very interesting. It’s a very interesting point. And that’s what war and being in power for a prolonged period of time can do. So on that topic, if you had a chance to talk to Putin, what kind of questions would you ask him? What would you like to find out about the man as he stands today?
Exactly. The people that surround you are not providing the kind of critical feedback necessary for democratic system. One of the things that Tucker said after his interview with Putin, he was just in his hotel just chatting on video, and he said that he felt like Putin was not very good at explaining himself, like a coherent, whole narrative of why the invasion happened or just this big picture. And he said that’s not because he doesn’t have one, but it’s been a long time since he’s had somebody around him where he has to explain himself to so he’s out of practice, which is very interesting. It’s a very interesting point. And that’s what war and being in power for a prolonged period of time can do. So on that topic, if you had a chance to talk to Putin, what kind of questions would you ask him? What would you like to find out about the man as he stands today?
Serhii Plokhy
As a historian, I have a lot of questions, and I have questions about when the decision was made to attack Ukraine and what went into this decision because we’re thinking about that, we’re trying to solve. As a historian, I have this big question. I have question about the Crimea when those decisions were made. So that sort of questions that interest me, but the rest either I think that I understand what is going on with him or I don’t expect the answer that can help. For example, a good question, whether you regret or not the start of the war in ’22, given the enormous, enormous casualties on both sides. But you can’t expect from a politician an honest answer to this question. Right? So there are questions to which I know he can’t answer honestly, and then there are other questions to which I think already provided all answers that he could. So what for me is of interest are basically questions for a historian about the timing and the logic of particular decisions.
As a historian, I have a lot of questions, and I have questions about when the decision was made to attack Ukraine and what went into this decision because we’re thinking about that, we’re trying to solve. As a historian, I have this big question. I have question about the Crimea when those decisions were made. So that sort of questions that interest me, but the rest either I think that I understand what is going on with him or I don’t expect the answer that can help. For example, a good question, whether you regret or not the start of the war in ’22, given the enormous, enormous casualties on both sides. But you can’t expect from a politician an honest answer to this question. Right? So there are questions to which I know he can’t answer honestly, and then there are other questions to which I think already provided all answers that he could. So what for me is of interest are basically questions for a historian about the timing and the logic of particular decisions.
Lex Fridman
Well, I do wonder how different what he says publicly is from what he thinks privately, so a question about when the decision to invade Ukraine happens is a very good question to give insight to the difference between how he thinks about the world privately versus what he says publicly. And same about empire is if you ask Putin, he will say he has no interest in empire and he finds the notion silly, but at the same time, perhaps privately there’s a sense in which he does seek the reunification of the Russian Empire.
Well, I do wonder how different what he says publicly is from what he thinks privately, so a question about when the decision to invade Ukraine happens is a very good question to give insight to the difference between how he thinks about the world privately versus what he says publicly. And same about empire is if you ask Putin, he will say he has no interest in empire and he finds the notion silly, but at the same time, perhaps privately there’s a sense in which he does seek the reunification of the Russian Empire.
Serhii Plokhy
Not in the form of the Russian Empire, not in the form of the Soviet Union, but certainly in some form of the Russian control. For me at least, it’s quite clear, otherwise there would be no busts to the Russian emperors and Catherine and Peter and others.
Not in the form of the Russian Empire, not in the form of the Soviet Union, but certainly in some form of the Russian control. For me at least, it’s quite clear, otherwise there would be no busts to the Russian emperors and Catherine and Peter and others.
Lex Fridman
You wrote in your book titled The Frontline: Essays on Ukraine’s Past and Present about the Russian question, I guess articulated by Solzhenitsyn first in 1994. Solzhenitsyn of course is the year of The Gulag Archipelago, he’s half Ukrainian. What is the Russian question?
You wrote in your book titled The Frontline: Essays on Ukraine’s Past and Present about the Russian question, I guess articulated by Solzhenitsyn first in 1994. Solzhenitsyn of course is the year of The Gulag Archipelago, he’s half Ukrainian. What is the Russian question?
Serhii Plokhy
Solzhenitsyn clearly identifies himself as a Russian, and his opposition to the communist regime was a position of a Russianist. So his argument was that communism was bad for Russia, and for him Russian question is about the ethnic Russians, but also he was thinking about Russians in Putin’s terms, how Putin thinks. In Solzhenitsyn’s terms about Ukrainians and Belorussians constituting part of that. So the Russian question is the biggest tragedy of the 20th century, the the loss of the statehood and division of the Russians between different states. This is the Solzhenitsyn Russian question, and his original idea and plan was presented in the essay that he published in 1990, which was called How We Should Restructure Russia.
Solzhenitsyn clearly identifies himself as a Russian, and his opposition to the communist regime was a position of a Russianist. So his argument was that communism was bad for Russia, and for him Russian question is about the ethnic Russians, but also he was thinking about Russians in Putin’s terms, how Putin thinks. In Solzhenitsyn’s terms about Ukrainians and Belorussians constituting part of that. So the Russian question is the biggest tragedy of the 20th century, the the loss of the statehood and division of the Russians between different states. This is the Solzhenitsyn Russian question, and his original idea and plan was presented in the essay that he published in 1990, which was called How We Should Restructure Russia.
And restructure Russia meant getting rid of the Baltics, Central Asia Caucasus and have Russians, Ukrainians, and Belorussians, including those who live in northern Kazakhstan to create one nation state. So he was a Russian nationalist, but he was thinking about Russian nation state as the state of Russians, Ukrainians, and Belorussians. And once the Soviet Union collapsed and his idea was not implemented in the 1990s, he formulated plan B, taking over by Russia of Donbas, Crimea, and southern Ukraine, the areas that now are included in the Russian constitution. So in historical terms and intellectual terms, what is happening today in the war between Russia and Ukraine is the vision on one level or another level that was formulated by the noble laureate Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, half Russian, half Ukrainian.
Lex Fridman
If there is such a thing, what would you say is the Ukrainian question as we stand today?
If there is such a thing, what would you say is the Ukrainian question as we stand today?
Serhii Plokhy
The Ukrainian question is very simple. Now it’s not anymore acquisition of the nation state, but actually a sovereign state. But it’s maintenance, so the Ukrainian question is like dozens of other questions in the 20th and 21st century, the rise of the new state. And that’s what is the Ukrainian question, whether Ukraine will continue to its existence as a nation, as an independent state, because that existence has been questioned by stating that Russians and Ukrainians so on are the same people, which de facto is saying your guy is Russian and also trying to destroy the state.
The Ukrainian question is very simple. Now it’s not anymore acquisition of the nation state, but actually a sovereign state. But it’s maintenance, so the Ukrainian question is like dozens of other questions in the 20th and 21st century, the rise of the new state. And that’s what is the Ukrainian question, whether Ukraine will continue to its existence as a nation, as an independent state, because that existence has been questioned by stating that Russians and Ukrainians so on are the same people, which de facto is saying your guy is Russian and also trying to destroy the state.
Lex Fridman
Is it possible that if the war in Ukraine continues for many more years, that the next leader that follows Zelensky would take Ukraine away from a democratic western style nation towards a more authoritarian one, maybe even with a far right influence, this kind of direction because of the influence of war?
Is it possible that if the war in Ukraine continues for many more years, that the next leader that follows Zelensky would take Ukraine away from a democratic western style nation towards a more authoritarian one, maybe even with a far right influence, this kind of direction because of the influence of war?
Serhii Plokhy
Everything is possible and the longer the war continues, the more likely a scenario like that becomes. But realization of that scenario would go against the grain of largest part of Ukrainian history. Where Ukraine really emerged as a pluralistic state on which the elements of democracy were built in the last 30 years would go against the grain of the Ukrainian society where, as one author formulated in the 1990s, he wrote a book, Ukrainian Nationalism: A Minority Faith, where the nationalist was a minority faith. And radical nationalism continues to be or at least continued to be in 2019 a minority faith during the last elections. So possible, but unlikely given the historical realities of the last 30+ years.
Everything is possible and the longer the war continues, the more likely a scenario like that becomes. But realization of that scenario would go against the grain of largest part of Ukrainian history. Where Ukraine really emerged as a pluralistic state on which the elements of democracy were built in the last 30 years would go against the grain of the Ukrainian society where, as one author formulated in the 1990s, he wrote a book, Ukrainian Nationalism: A Minority Faith, where the nationalist was a minority faith. And radical nationalism continues to be or at least continued to be in 2019 a minority faith during the last elections. So possible, but unlikely given the historical realities of the last 30+ years.
Holodomor
Lex Fridman
I could talk to you for many more hours on Chernobyl alone, since you’ve written a book on Chernobyl and nuclear disaster. There’s just a million possible conversations here, but let me just jump around history a little bit. Back before World War II, my grandmother lived through Holodomor and World War II, Nazi-occupied Ukraine. Holodomor, what do you learn let’s say about human nature and about governments and nations from the fact that Holodomor happened? And maybe you could say what it is and why it happened?
I could talk to you for many more hours on Chernobyl alone, since you’ve written a book on Chernobyl and nuclear disaster. There’s just a million possible conversations here, but let me just jump around history a little bit. Back before World War II, my grandmother lived through Holodomor and World War II, Nazi-occupied Ukraine. Holodomor, what do you learn let’s say about human nature and about governments and nations from the fact that Holodomor happened? And maybe you could say what it is and why it happened?
Serhii Plokhy
Holodomor is a massive famine in Ukraine between the years 1932 and 1934, and it happened as the result of forceful collectivization of the agriculture, and a tamp on the part of Stalin also really roll Ukraine into the Soviet Union with basically no potential opposition from Ukraine, now national communists. So two things came together in December of 1932 when in the same decree, Stalin and Molotov signed a decree on the acquisition of the grain, which led eventually to the mass starvation, and on the banning of Ukrainian language publications and education in other Soviet republics outside of Ukraine, and introducing limitations on the so-called Ukrainianization policies, so the use of Ukrainian language in Ukraine itself. And the numbers are debated. The numbers that most of the scholars work today are 4 million, but again, there are larger numbers as well that circulate.
Holodomor is a massive famine in Ukraine between the years 1932 and 1934, and it happened as the result of forceful collectivization of the agriculture, and a tamp on the part of Stalin also really roll Ukraine into the Soviet Union with basically no potential opposition from Ukraine, now national communists. So two things came together in December of 1932 when in the same decree, Stalin and Molotov signed a decree on the acquisition of the grain, which led eventually to the mass starvation, and on the banning of Ukrainian language publications and education in other Soviet republics outside of Ukraine, and introducing limitations on the so-called Ukrainianization policies, so the use of Ukrainian language in Ukraine itself. And the numbers are debated. The numbers that most of the scholars work today are 4 million, but again, there are larger numbers as well that circulate.
The famine of ’32-’33 was not exclusive Ukrainian phenomenon, but most of Ukraine in the Soviet Union died in Ukraine. And Ukraine was the only place where the policy on collecting grain were coming together with the policy of the cleansing of the political leadership, sending people from Moscow to recover the leadership and attack on Ukrainian culture. So in terms of what I learn about human nature, it’s more me learning about the ideologies of the 20th century because it’s not the only famine in the communist lands. The famine in China, which was in terms of the numbers, much more devastating than that. It’s in a different category and for a good reason, but you have Holocaust. What unites these things is the time. This is 20th century.
What unites them are the dominance in the societies that are doing that, really ideologies that not just devalued human life, but considered that actually the way forward is by destroying large group of populations defined ethnically, religiously, socially, or otherwise, which tells about the time, but tells also about humanity because for centuries before that human life was valued. There were enemies, but the idea was that human life can put and at the end of the day, they can be slaves. You can use them for productive force. Countries in the 18th century with southern Ukraine, they were looking for settlers, for people to bring and live on land. You move into the 20th century and there is mass destruction of the population in the name of ideologies, which basically are by definition destroy human lives.
And that’s what’s really so shocking and striking because that break with not just with issues of morale, not just with issues of humanity, with any common sense, what is happening. And I’m absolutely convinced that we didn’t learn the lesson. I’m absolutely convinced that we didn’t learn the lesson. With turning our page on fascism communism, we somehow decided that we are free of that. That at least in those terms, history came to and end. That what is ahead is the future and nothing of that sort. What happened would take place to a degree that people would get in trouble for comparing any statements or events that happening today with the communism or fascism. And so I feel responsibility of myself and as a historian in particular for not doing a better job about telling people that, “Well, we are who we are and we have as humans our dark side and we have to be very careful.”
Lex Fridman
So there is a human capacity to be captured by an idea, an ideology that claims to bring up a better world as the Nazis did, as Soviet Union did. And on the path of doing that, devaluing human life, that we will bring a better world. And if millions of people have to be tortured on the way to that, all right, but at least we have a better world and human beings are able to if not accept it, look the other way.
So there is a human capacity to be captured by an idea, an ideology that claims to bring up a better world as the Nazis did, as Soviet Union did. And on the path of doing that, devaluing human life, that we will bring a better world. And if millions of people have to be tortured on the way to that, all right, but at least we have a better world and human beings are able to if not accept it, look the other way.
Serhii Plokhy
Yes. And in the name of a particular nation or race, like it was the Third Reich or in the name of the humanity of the future. So not just devalue human life, destroy human life.
Yes. And in the name of a particular nation or race, like it was the Third Reich or in the name of the humanity of the future. So not just devalue human life, destroy human life.
Chernobyl
Lex Fridman
Is there something fundamental about communism and centralized planning that’s part of the problem here? Maybe this also connects to the story of Chernobyl, where the Chernobyl disaster is not just a story of failure of a nuclear power plant, but it’s an entire institution of the scientific and nuclear institution, but the entirety of the government.
Is there something fundamental about communism and centralized planning that’s part of the problem here? Maybe this also connects to the story of Chernobyl, where the Chernobyl disaster is not just a story of failure of a nuclear power plant, but it’s an entire institution of the scientific and nuclear institution, but the entirety of the government.
Serhii Plokhy
There is, and there is a number of factors of political and social character that produced Chernobyl. One of them is generally the atmosphere of secrecy in the Soviet Union in the conditions of the Cold War. Chernobyl reactor was a dual purpose reactor. It could boil water today and produce enriched uranium tomorrow, so it was top secret and if there were problems with that reactor, those problems were kept secret even at people who operated the reactor. That’s what happened in Chernobyl. Another big, big part of the story, which is specifically Soviet, that’s the nature of the managerial culture and administrative culture in which people had no right to make their own decisions in their place, in their position.
There is, and there is a number of factors of political and social character that produced Chernobyl. One of them is generally the atmosphere of secrecy in the Soviet Union in the conditions of the Cold War. Chernobyl reactor was a dual purpose reactor. It could boil water today and produce enriched uranium tomorrow, so it was top secret and if there were problems with that reactor, those problems were kept secret even at people who operated the reactor. That’s what happened in Chernobyl. Another big, big part of the story, which is specifically Soviet, that’s the nature of the managerial culture and administrative culture in which people had no right to make their own decisions in their place, in their position.
A few years before that, Three Mile Island happened, which was a big, big nuclear disaster, but in terms of consequences, nothing like Chernobyl. And there in the context of the American legal culture and managerial culture, people who were operators, who were in managerial positions, that was their responsibility to take decisions. President Carter came there, but he was not calling shots on none of those issues. What you see with Chernobyl, and people who saw HBO series know that very well, the moment the high official arrives, everyone actually falls in line, it’s the official who calls the shot. And to move population from the city of Pripyat, you needed the okay coming from Moscow from the very top. So that is Soviet story, and then there is a global story of cutting corners to meet either deadlines like it was with that test that they were running at that time, or to meet production quotas. This is not just socialist thing, you can-
Serhii Plokhy
… quotas, this is not just socialist thing. You can replace production quotas with profit and you get the same story. So some parts in that story are generally reflective of today’s world in general. Others are very specific, very specific for Soviet Union, for Soviet experience. And then the biggest, probably, Soviet part of that story is that on the one hand, the government in Moscow and Kiev, they mobilize all resources to deal with that, but they keep information about what is happening and the radiation clouds secret from the rest of the population, something that completely would be impossible and was impossible in the US, in UK where other accidents happened.
… quotas, this is not just socialist thing. You can replace production quotas with profit and you get the same story. So some parts in that story are generally reflective of today’s world in general. Others are very specific, very specific for Soviet Union, for Soviet experience. And then the biggest, probably, Soviet part of that story is that on the one hand, the government in Moscow and Kiev, they mobilize all resources to deal with that, but they keep information about what is happening and the radiation clouds secret from the rest of the population, something that completely would be impossible and was impossible in the US, in UK where other accidents happened.
And then guess what? A few years later, the Soviet Union collapses very much also thanks to the mobilization of people over the issue of Chernobyl and nuclear energy. People writing about that subject call it eco-nationalism, ecological nationalism, which comes at least in part from withholding information from people. And in Ukraine, mobilization didn’t start over the issues that led to independence, didn’t start over the issue of language or didn’t start over the issue of national autonomy. It started under the slogans, “Tell us the truth about Chernobyl. We want to know whether we live in contaminated areas or not.”
And that was a very, very strong factor that crossed, not just ethnic religious linguistic lines, lines between members of the party and not members of the party of the top§ leadership and not in military and civilian because it turned out that the party card didn’t protect you from being affected by radiation. So the all national mobilization happens. The first mass manifestations are about Chernobyl, not about anything else.
Lex Fridman
That’s fascinating. For people who might not know, Chernobyl is located in Ukraine. It’s a fascinating view that Chernobyl might be one of the critical threshold catalysts for the collapse of the Soviet Union. That’s very interesting. Just as a small aside, I guess this is a good moment to give some love to the HBO series. Even though it’s British accents and so on, it made me realize that some of these stories in Eastern Europe could be told very effectively through film, through series. It’s so incredibly well done. And maybe I can ask you. Historically speaking, were you impressed?
That’s fascinating. For people who might not know, Chernobyl is located in Ukraine. It’s a fascinating view that Chernobyl might be one of the critical threshold catalysts for the collapse of the Soviet Union. That’s very interesting. Just as a small aside, I guess this is a good moment to give some love to the HBO series. Even though it’s British accents and so on, it made me realize that some of these stories in Eastern Europe could be told very effectively through film, through series. It’s so incredibly well done. And maybe I can ask you. Historically speaking, were you impressed?
Serhii Plokhy
I was. I was and I think that the mini-series are very truthful on a number of levels and very untruthful on some others. And they got very well the macro and micro levels. So the macro level is the issue of the big truth and the story there is very much built around the theme that I just discussed now. It’s about the cost of lies and the Soviet Union lying to the people. And that’s what the film explores. So that, I call it a big truth about Chernobyl. And they got a lot of minor things really, really very well. Like the curtains on the windows, like how the houses looked from inside and outside. I didn’t see any post-Soviet film or any western film that would be so good at capturing those everyday details.
I was. I was and I think that the mini-series are very truthful on a number of levels and very untruthful on some others. And they got very well the macro and micro levels. So the macro level is the issue of the big truth and the story there is very much built around the theme that I just discussed now. It’s about the cost of lies and the Soviet Union lying to the people. And that’s what the film explores. So that, I call it a big truth about Chernobyl. And they got a lot of minor things really, really very well. Like the curtains on the windows, like how the houses looked from inside and outside. I didn’t see any post-Soviet film or any western film that would be so good at capturing those everyday details.
But then there is a huge gray area in between big truth and small truths of recreating the environment. And that’s how you get from one to another. And then you see the KGB officers coming and taking someone out of the meeting and arresting, which was not necessary. You see the Soviet boss threatening someone to throw the person from the helicopter. So you get these Hollywood sort of things despite the fact that it’s HBO series. And they’re the best really as a film in the fourth episode where they completely decided just to hell with the reality and let’s make a film.
So they bring Legasov, one of the key characters, to the court meetings. They bring Soviet party boss, Shcherbina, he wasn’t there. They created drama there. So they got the main thing, the big truth right, and that’s why I like this production.
Lex Fridman
Sometimes to show what something felt like you have to go bigger than it actually was. If you… I don’t know. If you experience heartbreak and you see a film about it, you want there to be explosions.
Sometimes to show what something felt like you have to go bigger than it actually was. If you… I don’t know. If you experience heartbreak and you see a film about it, you want there to be explosions.
Serhii Plokhy
You want to see this in images. Visible, right? But the question again, I just mentioned KGB marching in and some party leader giving a speech, they were not giving that speech, but the sense was there and it was in the air and I, as people of my generation who were there, knew that and recognized that. But for new generation, whether they are in Ukraine and Russia, in US, in Britain, in Zimbabwe, anywhere, you have do these little untruths and introduce them. And I had a very interesting on-air conversation with the author of the script, Mazin, and I asked him the question of the film declared really the importance of the truth, but how do you square that with the need in the film, to really put it mildly, to go beyond the measures of truth, whatever understanding of that term is?
You want to see this in images. Visible, right? But the question again, I just mentioned KGB marching in and some party leader giving a speech, they were not giving that speech, but the sense was there and it was in the air and I, as people of my generation who were there, knew that and recognized that. But for new generation, whether they are in Ukraine and Russia, in US, in Britain, in Zimbabwe, anywhere, you have do these little untruths and introduce them. And I had a very interesting on-air conversation with the author of the script, Mazin, and I asked him the question of the film declared really the importance of the truth, but how do you square that with the need in the film, to really put it mildly, to go beyond the measures of truth, whatever understanding of that term is?
Lex Fridman
Well, I suppose it is a bit terrifying that some of the most dramatic moments in history are probably quite mundane. The decisions to begin wars, invasions, they’re probably something like a Zoom meeting on a random Tuesday in today’s workplace. So it’s not like there’s dramatic music playing. These are just human decisions and they command armies and they command destruction. I personally, because of that, believe in the power of individuals to be able to stop wars, not just start wars, individual leaders.
Well, I suppose it is a bit terrifying that some of the most dramatic moments in history are probably quite mundane. The decisions to begin wars, invasions, they’re probably something like a Zoom meeting on a random Tuesday in today’s workplace. So it’s not like there’s dramatic music playing. These are just human decisions and they command armies and they command destruction. I personally, because of that, believe in the power of individuals to be able to stop wars, not just start wars, individual leaders.
Nuclear power
So let me just ask about nuclear safety because there’s an interesting point you make. You wrote in the book in Atoms and Ashes: A Global History of Nuclear Disasters, so technically nuclear energy is extremely safe. If there’s a number of people died per energy generated, it’s much safer than coal oil, for example, as far as I understand. But the case you also make is you write, quote, “Many of the political, economic, social and cultural factors that led to the accidents of the past are still with us today, making the nuclear industry vulnerable to repeating old mistakes in new and unexpected ways and any new accidents are certain to create new anti-nuclear mobilization.”
And then you continue with, “This makes the nuclear industry not only risky to operate, but also impossible to count on as a long-term solution to an overwhelming problem.” Can you explain that perspective? It’s an interesting one, speaking to the psychology when an accident does happen, it has a dramatic effect. And also speaking to the fact that accidents can happen, not because of the safety of the nuclear power plant, but of the underlying structure of government that oversees it.
Serhii Plokhy
Yes, I wrote a book on Chernobyl and then I tried to understand Chernobyl better by placing it in the context of other disasters. As a historian I was looking at the political factors and social factors and cultural factors, not the physics or engineering part of the story. And the factors that are still with us are, like it was the case in Chernobyl, the authoritarian regimes and high centralization of the decision-making and desire to cut corners and also the issues associated with secrecy.
Yes, I wrote a book on Chernobyl and then I tried to understand Chernobyl better by placing it in the context of other disasters. As a historian I was looking at the political factors and social factors and cultural factors, not the physics or engineering part of the story. And the factors that are still with us are, like it was the case in Chernobyl, the authoritarian regimes and high centralization of the decision-making and desire to cut corners and also the issues associated with secrecy.
So that is with us, if you look at where the future of the nuclear industry is now at this point, it’s the regimes and powers in the Middle East, that’s a big new frontier. The countries that are not particularly known for the history of democratic existence. Where we also have the situation that we had at Three Mile Island that we had at Chernobyl, this is the first generation nuclear engineers. So people who are, where the country doesn’t have a lot of experience and generations after generations working in that particular industry where it’s all new. That is certainly additional risk.
And what we got now with this current war is something that… Not that people completely didn’t expect, but didn’t happen in the past. You see the war come into the nuclear sites, Chernobyl was taken over by the Russian army or National Guard rather, on the first day of the invasion. Then there was Zaporizhzhia, the largest nuclear power plant in Europe where the battle was waged on the territory of the nuclear power plant. The missiles being fired, buildings catching fire, and the situation that brought the Fukushima disaster was there at Zaporizhzhia more than once, and Fukushima came because the reactors were shut down as they are at Zaporizhzhia, but they still needed electricity to bring water and to them down.
And in Fukushima case, it was the tsunami that cut off the supply of electricity. In the case of Zaporizhzhia, there was the warfare that was happening in the area around Zaporizhzhia that did the same effect. So we have 440 reactors in the world today, plus minus. None of them was designed to withstand the direct missile attack or to function in the conditions of the warfare. Operators they’re human, then they make mistakes like they did it Three Mile Island or Chernobyl. But think also if the war is happening around them, if they’re not sure what is happening with their families, if they don’t know whether next missile, whether will hit the control room or not, that multiplies also.
So we are in a situation where we are not done yet with the nuclear accidents. It’s not like we don’t pay attention or we don’t learn. Smart people work on that and after every accident, try to figure the way how not to step into the same trap. But next accident would actually expose new vulnerability. You deal with Chernobyl and then tsunami comes. You deal with tsunami and then war comes. And we really in that sense, we have sometimes wild imagination, but sometimes it’s difficult to imagine what can happen next. So we are not done. There will be nuclear accidents unfortunately in the future.
And that makes nuclear energy so problematic when you count on it to fight climate change. I’ll explain why. You gave the figures how many people die from burning coal, from how many people die from radiation. And it’s a good argument. Some people would question them because it’s also the issue of not just dying, but impact of radiation on cancer, on our health, which is not completely understood yet. So still there is a lot of question marks, but let’s assume what you’re saying, that’s the figures. That’s how it is. But we as people, for whatever reason are not afraid of coal, but we’re very much afraid of radiation. It’s invisible, it’s everywhere and you can’t see it.
And then you start having issues and then you have problems during the COVID, the governments closed the borders, maybe a good idea, maybe not so good ideas, isolation. So that was the way governments started to fight for access, to fight, to Moderna, to Sputnik, to whatever it’s, to vaccine. So now back to the radiation. What is happening once Chernobyl happens? That’s the highest point in the development of nuclear industry so far in terms of how many new reactors were commissioned or the licenses were issued.
The next reactor after Three Mile Island in the US go ahead was given, it seems to me 10 years ago or something like that, the Fukushima happens, the reaction is in China to that as well. They’re very much concerned. So there is a saying in the field, “Anywhere is Chernobyl everywhere.” After Fukushima, Germany decides to go nuclear-free and gets there at the expense of burning coal. So that’s how we react. And each major accident, that means global freeze on the nuclear reactor production for at least another 10 years. So that’s what I mean that nuclear industry is politic, not just in terms of technology and not just in terms of radiation, impact on health, but also politically a very, very unreliable option.
Lex Fridman
And to you, you suspect that’s an irreparable aspect of human nature in the human mind that there are certain things that just create a kind of panic, invisible threats of this kind. Whether it’s a virus or radiation. There’s something about the mind, if I get a stomach ache in the United States after Fukushima, I kind of think it’s probably radiation, this kind of irrational type of thinking. And that’s not possible to repair?
And to you, you suspect that’s an irreparable aspect of human nature in the human mind that there are certain things that just create a kind of panic, invisible threats of this kind. Whether it’s a virus or radiation. There’s something about the mind, if I get a stomach ache in the United States after Fukushima, I kind of think it’s probably radiation, this kind of irrational type of thinking. And that’s not possible to repair?
Serhii Plokhy
I think we can be trained. We can be trained.
I think we can be trained. We can be trained.
Lex Fridman
Pretty smart, aren’t we? Education.
Pretty smart, aren’t we? Education.
Serhii Plokhy
But generally, we are afraid of things that we see, but even more, we’re afraid of things that we don’t see and radiation is one of those.
But generally, we are afraid of things that we see, but even more, we’re afraid of things that we don’t see and radiation is one of those.
Future of the world
Lex Fridman
Let’s zoom out on the world. We talked about the war in Ukraine. How does the war in Ukraine change the world order? Let me just look at everything that’s going on. Zoom out a bit. China, the Israel-Gaza war, the Middle East, India. What is interesting to you, important to think about, in the coming years and decades?
Let’s zoom out on the world. We talked about the war in Ukraine. How does the war in Ukraine change the world order? Let me just look at everything that’s going on. Zoom out a bit. China, the Israel-Gaza war, the Middle East, India. What is interesting to you, important to think about, in the coming years and decades?
Serhii Plokhy
As a historian, and I’m trained that way, I have a feeling of deja vu. I see the Cold War is coming back in many of its features. And the war started, and we discussed that, in 2014, at least in my interpretation, with Russia trying to really reestablish its control over the post-Soviet space and Ukraine was crucial for that project. The more global Russian vision since 1990s was that they didn’t like the American monopolar world. They knew and realized that they couldn’t go back to the bipolar world of the Cold War era. So the vision was multipolar world. Again, it wasn’t just academic exercise, it was a political exercise in which Russia would be one of the poles on par with China, on par with European Union, on par with the United States. That’s very broadly speaking the context in which the war starts in 2014.
As a historian, and I’m trained that way, I have a feeling of deja vu. I see the Cold War is coming back in many of its features. And the war started, and we discussed that, in 2014, at least in my interpretation, with Russia trying to really reestablish its control over the post-Soviet space and Ukraine was crucial for that project. The more global Russian vision since 1990s was that they didn’t like the American monopolar world. They knew and realized that they couldn’t go back to the bipolar world of the Cold War era. So the vision was multipolar world. Again, it wasn’t just academic exercise, it was a political exercise in which Russia would be one of the poles on par with China, on par with European Union, on par with the United States. That’s very broadly speaking the context in which the war starts in 2014.
Where we are now? Well, we are now in Russia certainly trying to regain its military strength, but no one actually believes that Russia is the superpower it was imagined before 2022. We see certainly Russia finding the way to deal with the sanctions, but we don’t see certainly Russia as an economic power with any sort of a future. So it is not an implosion of the Russian military economic and political power, but it’s significantly… actually it’s diminished. So today, very difficult to imagine Russia emerging as another pole of the multipolar world. Not impossible, but the war certainly made that very problematic and much more difficult.
On the other hand, what the war did, it basically awakened the old West. United States and Western Europe transatlantic alliance. On the top of that, there are East European countries that are even much, even much stronger proponents of assistance for Ukraine than is Germany or the United States of America. So it is the replay of the Cold War story, the Return of the West, one of the chapters in my book, the Russo-Ukrainian War is called that way. We also can see the elements of the rebuilding of the Beijing-Moscow alliance of the 1950s, which was a very important part of the Cold War. It was extremely important part of the Korean War that in many ways launched also the Cold War globally.
So I see a lot of parallels of going back to the time of the Cold War and the bipolar world that emerges, it’s not anymore the world focused on Washington and Moscow. It’s more like world focused on Washington and Beijing. And then there are countries in between. There are countries in between that join one bloc or another bloc that is emerging that is not fully formed. This, in my opinion, makes the task of us historians to really go back to the Cold War and look through new perspective on the history of that conflict because there is a lot of things that we can learn.
Lex Fridman
So in some ways, history does repeat itself here. So now it’s a cold war with China and the United States. What’s a hopeful trajectory for the 21st century for the rest of it?
So in some ways, history does repeat itself here. So now it’s a cold war with China and the United States. What’s a hopeful trajectory for the 21st century for the rest of it?
Serhii Plokhy
The hopeful trajectory is really trying to be as wise and as lucky as our predecessors during the Cold War War were. Because the dominant discourse so far about the Cold War was what a horrible thing that Cold War was. What did we do wrong? How did we end up in the Cold War? And I think especially today, this is a wrong question to ask. The right question to ask is how did it happen? What did we do so right that for now more than 70 years, we don’t have a world war? How come that after World War I, World War II came within 20 years? What helped us to keep the world on the brink, but still away from the global war for such a long period of time? How to keep the Cold War cold. That’s the biggest lesson that the history of the Cold War can give us. And I don’t think we ask the question quite often enough, ask the question that way. And if you don’t ask right questions, we don’t get right answers.
The hopeful trajectory is really trying to be as wise and as lucky as our predecessors during the Cold War War were. Because the dominant discourse so far about the Cold War was what a horrible thing that Cold War was. What did we do wrong? How did we end up in the Cold War? And I think especially today, this is a wrong question to ask. The right question to ask is how did it happen? What did we do so right that for now more than 70 years, we don’t have a world war? How come that after World War I, World War II came within 20 years? What helped us to keep the world on the brink, but still away from the global war for such a long period of time? How to keep the Cold War cold. That’s the biggest lesson that the history of the Cold War can give us. And I don’t think we ask the question quite often enough, ask the question that way. And if you don’t ask right questions, we don’t get right answers.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, you’ve written a book, a great book on the Cuban Missile crisis. We came very close, not to just another world war, but to a nuclear war and the destruction of human civilization as we know it. So I guess it’s a good question to ask, what did we do so right? And maybe one of the answers could be that we just got lucky. And the question is how do we keep getting lucky?
Yeah, you’ve written a book, a great book on the Cuban Missile crisis. We came very close, not to just another world war, but to a nuclear war and the destruction of human civilization as we know it. So I guess it’s a good question to ask, what did we do so right? And maybe one of the answers could be that we just got lucky. And the question is how do we keep getting lucky?
Serhii Plokhy
Luck is clearly, clearly one of the factors in Cuban Missile crisis because what happened there, and there is one of the lessons, is that eventually, the commanders at the top, they believe that they have all the cards, they negotiate with each other. They try to see who blinks first in the game of nuclear brinkmanship. The trick is that they don’t control fully people on the ground. The most dangerous moment, or one of the most dangerous moment of the Cuban Missile crisis was the Soviet missile shooting down the American airplane, killing the pilot, an act of war. So technically we’re already in the war. And the order to shoot the missile was given with Moscow having no clue what was going on the ground. Moscow never gave approval for that.
Luck is clearly, clearly one of the factors in Cuban Missile crisis because what happened there, and there is one of the lessons, is that eventually, the commanders at the top, they believe that they have all the cards, they negotiate with each other. They try to see who blinks first in the game of nuclear brinkmanship. The trick is that they don’t control fully people on the ground. The most dangerous moment, or one of the most dangerous moment of the Cuban Missile crisis was the Soviet missile shooting down the American airplane, killing the pilot, an act of war. So technically we’re already in the war. And the order to shoot the missile was given with Moscow having no clue what was going on the ground. Moscow never gave approval for that.
And again, I described that in book many times about Kennedy bringing back his wisdom from World War II years. There always will be SOB who didn’t get the order or missed things that was happening on the American side as well. So people who believe that they’re in control really are not in control, and that can escalate whether they very often against their wishes. So that is one lesson, but going back to what we’re still here and why the world didn’t end up in 1962 is that the leadership, and I come to the issue that you strongly believe in that people, personalities matter, leaders matter. They were very different. Age, education, political careers, understanding what politics are and so on and so forth.
Lex Fridman
You mean Khrushchev?
You mean Khrushchev?
Serhii Plokhy
Khrushchev and Kennedy. Yes, but they had one thing in common, that in one way they belong to the same generation. That was generation of the Bikini Atoll, that was the generation of the hydrogen bomb. The bomb that unlike the atomic bomb, they knew could destroy the world. And they were scared. They were scared of the nuclear weapons and they tried to do whatever they could pushing against their advisors or trying to deal with their anxieties. The first is true for Kennedy, later maybe for Khrushchev to make sure that the war between the United States and the Soviet Union doesn’t start because they knew that that war would be a nuclear war.
Khrushchev and Kennedy. Yes, but they had one thing in common, that in one way they belong to the same generation. That was generation of the Bikini Atoll, that was the generation of the hydrogen bomb. The bomb that unlike the atomic bomb, they knew could destroy the world. And they were scared. They were scared of the nuclear weapons and they tried to do whatever they could pushing against their advisors or trying to deal with their anxieties. The first is true for Kennedy, later maybe for Khrushchev to make sure that the war between the United States and the Soviet Union doesn’t start because they knew that that war would be a nuclear war.
So we have a very, very paradoxical sort of situation. The crisis occurred because of the nuclear weapons, because Khrushchev put them on Cuba, but the crisis was resolved and we didn’t end in the third World War because of the nuclear weapons, because people, leaders were afraid of them. And that’s where I want to put emphasis. It’s not that the nuclear weapons created crisis or solved the crisis, it’s basically our perception of them. And we are now in the age after the Cold War era, with the new generation of voters, with the new generation of politicians. We don’t belong to the generation of bikini atoll. You maybe know what bikini is, but we think that this is something-
Lex Fridman
It’s a different thing. Yeah.
It’s a different thing. Yeah.
Serhii Plokhy
… That this is something else. And it’s very important.
… That this is something else. And it’s very important.
Lex Fridman
It’s so fascinating how that fades into memory, that the power and the respect and fear of the power of nuclear weapons just fades into memory. And then we may very well make the same mistakes again.
It’s so fascinating how that fades into memory, that the power and the respect and fear of the power of nuclear weapons just fades into memory. And then we may very well make the same mistakes again.
Serhii Plokhy
Yes, we can.
Yes, we can.
Lex Fridman
Another leader said that, I believe, but about a totally different topic. Well, like you said, I’m also glad that we’re here as a civilization, that we’re still seem to be going on. There’s several billion of us. And I’m also glad that the two of us are here. I’ve read a lot of your books. I’ve been recommending it. Please keep writing. Thank you for talking today. This was an honor.
Another leader said that, I believe, but about a totally different topic. Well, like you said, I’m also glad that we’re here as a civilization, that we’re still seem to be going on. There’s several billion of us. And I’m also glad that the two of us are here. I’ve read a lot of your books. I’ve been recommending it. Please keep writing. Thank you for talking today. This was an honor.
Serhii Plokhy
Thank you very much, Lex. It was a pleasure.
Thank you very much, Lex. It was a pleasure.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Serhii Plokhy. To support this podcast. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Ernest Hemingway. “Never think that war, no matter how necessary nor how justified is not a crime.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Serhii Plokhy. To support this podcast. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from Ernest Hemingway. “Never think that war, no matter how necessary nor how justified is not a crime.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Tucker Carlson: Putin, Navalny, Trump, CIA, NSA, War, Politics & Freedom | Lex Fridman Podcast #414
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #414 with Tucker Carlson.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
For people who think I shouldn’t do the conversation with Tucker or generally think that there are certain people I should never talk to, I’m sorry, but I disagree. I will talk to everyone, as long as they’re willing to talk genuinely in long form for 2, 3, 4 or more hours. I’ll talk to Putin and to Zelensky, to Trump and to Biden, to Tucker and to John Stewart, AOC, Obama, and many more people with very different views on the world. I want to understand people and ideas. That’s what long form conversations are supposed to be all about. Now for people who criticize me for not asking tough questions, I hear you, but again, I disagree. I do often ask tough questions. But I try to do it in a way that doesn’t shut down the other person, putting them into a defensive state where they give only shallow talking points. Instead, I’m looking always for the expression of genuinely held ideas and the deep roots of those ideas. When done well, this gives us a chance to really hear out the guest and to begin to understand what and how they think.
And I trust the intelligence of you, the listener, to make up your own mind to see through the bullshit, to the degree there’s bullshit and to see to the heart of the person. Sometimes I fail at this, but I’ll continue working my ass off to improve. All that said, I find that this no tough questions criticism often happens when the guest is a person the listener simply hates and wants to see them grilled into embarrassment. Called the liar, a greedy egomaniac, a killer, maybe even an evil human being and so on. If you are such a listener, what you want is drama, not wisdom. In this case, this show is not for you. There are many shows you can go to for that with hosts that are way more charismatic and entertaining than I’ll ever be. If you do stick around, please know I will work hard to do this well and to keep improving. Thank you for your patience and thank you for your support. I love you all. This is a Lex Fridman podcast To support it. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Tucker Carlson.
What was your first impression when you met Vladimir Putin for the interview?
And so I alluded to that in my question and rather than answering it, he went off on this long from my perspective, kind of tiresome, sort of greatest hits of Russian history. And the implication I thought was, “Well, Ukraine is ours, or Eastern Ukraine is ours already.” And I thought he was doing that to avoid answering the question. So the last thing you want when you’re interviewing someone is to get rolled, and I didn’t want to be rolled. So I, a couple of times interrupted him politely, I thought, but he wasn’t having it. And then I thought, “You know what? I’m not here to prove that I’m a great interviewer. It’s kind of not about me.”
I want to know who this guy is. I think a western audience, a global audience, has a right to know more about the guy, and so just let him talk. Because I don’t feel like my reputation’s on the line. People have already drawn conclusions about me, I suppose to the extent they have. I’m not interested really in those conclusions anyway, so just let him talk. And so I calmed down and just let him talk. And in retrospect, I thought that was really, really interesting. Whether you agree with it or not, or whether you think it’s relevant to the war in Ukraine or not, that was his answer. And so it’s inherently significant.
We were in Molotov’s old office. So for me, I was just blown away by that. I thought I knew a lot about Russia. It turns out I knew a lot about the Soviet period, the 1937 purge trials, the famine in Ukraine. I knew a fair amount about that, but I really knew nothing about contemporary Russia, less than I thought I did, it turned out. But yeah, I was just blown away by where we were, and that’s kind of one of the main drivers at this stage in my life. That’s why I do what I do, is because I’m interested in stuff and I want to see as much as I can and try and draw conclusions from it to the extent I can. So I was very much caught up in that. But no, I wasn’t nervous. I didn’t think he was going to kill me or something, and I’m not particularly afraid of that anyway.
I mean, I guess I reject the whole premise of the war in Ukraine from the American perspective, which is a tiny group of dumb people in Washington has decided to do this for reasons they won’t really explain. And you don’t have a role in it at all as an American citizen, as the person who’s paying for it, whose children might be drafted to fight it. To shut up and obey, I just reject that completely. I think, I guess I’m a child of a different era. I’m a child of participatory democracy to some extent, where your opinion as a citizen is not irrelevant. And I guess the level of lying about it was starting to drive me crazy.
And I’ve said, and I will say again, I’m not an expert on the regional, really any region other than say western Maine. I just don’t, I’m not Russian, but it was obvious to me that we were being lied to in ways that were just… It was crazy, the scale of lies. And I’ll just give you one example. The idea that Ukraine would inevitably win this war. Now victory was never, as it never is, defined precisely. Nothing’s ever defined precisely, which is always to tell that there’s deception at the heart of the claim. But Ukraine’s on the verge of winning. Well, I don’t know. I mean, I’m hardly a tactician or military expert. For the fifth time, I’m not an expert on Russia or Ukraine. I just looked at Wikipedia. Russia has a hundred million more people than Ukraine, a hundred million.
It has much deeper industrial capacity, war material capacity than all of NATO combined. For example, Russia is turning out artillery shells, which are significant in a ground war at a ratio of seven to one compared to all NATO countries combined. That’s all of Europe. Russia is producing seven times the artillery shells as all of Europe combined. What? That’s an amazing fact, and it turns out to be a really significant fact. In fact, the significant fact. But if you ask your average person in this country, even a fairly well-informed person of good faith who’s just trying to understand what’s going on, who’s going to win this war? Well, Ukraine’s going to win. They’re on the right side.
And they think that because our media who really just do serve the interest of the US government, period, they are state media in that sense, have told them that for over two years. And I was in Hungary last summer talking to the Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, who’s whatever you think of him, he’s a very smart guy, very smart guy, smart on a scale that we’re not used to in our leaders. And I said to him, off camera, “So is Ukraine going to win?” And he looked at me like I was deranged or I was congenitally deficient. Are they going to win? No. Of course they can’t win. It’s tiny compared to Russia. Russia has a wartime economy. Ukraine doesn’t really have an economy. No, look at the populations. He looked at me like I was stupid.
And I said to him, “I think most Americans believe that because NBC News and CNN and all the news channels, all of them tell them that because it’s framed exclusively in moral terms, and it’s Churchill versus Hitler. And of course, Churchill’s going to prevail in the end.” And it’s just so dishonest that it doesn’t even matter what I want to happen or what I think ought to happen, that’s a distortion of what is happening. And if I have any job at all, which I sort of don’t actually at this point, but if I do have a job, it’s to just try to be honest, and that’s a lie.
So yeah, we were close to that a year and a half ago, and the Biden administration dispatched Boris Johnson, the briefly prime minister of the UK to stop it and to say to Zelensky, who I feel sorry for by the way, because he’s caught between these forces that are bigger than he is, to say, “No, you cannot come to any terms with Russia.” And the result of that has not been a Ukrainian victory. It’s just been more dead Ukrainians and a lot of profit for the West. It’s a moral crime in my opinion. And I tried to ask Boris Johnson about it because why wouldn’t I? After he denounced me as a tool of the Kremlin or something, and he demanded a million dollars to talk to me. And this just happened last week. And by the way, in writing too, I’m not making this…
It’s not about me. I don’t think I’m an especially good person. I’ve definitely never claimed to be, but people can make their own judgments. And again, the only judgments that I care about are my wife and children and God. So I’m just not interested in proving I’m a good person and I just want to hear from him. And I had a lot of… I mean, you should see, I almost never write questions down, but I did in this case because I had months… Well, I had three years to think about it as I was trying to book the interview, which I did myself. But it was all about internal Russian politics and Navalny. And I had a lot of, what I thought, really good questions. And then at the last second, and you make these decisions, as you know, since you interview people a lot, often you make them on the fly.
And I thought, “No, I want to talk about the things that haven’t been talked about and that I think matter in a world historic sense.” And the number one among those, of course, is the war and what it means for the world. And so I stuck to that. I mean, I did ask about Gershkovich, who I felt sorry for, and I wanted Putin to release him to me. And I was offended that he didn’t. I thought his rationale was absurd. “Well, we want to trade him for someone.” I said, “Well, doesn’t that make him a hostage?” Which of course it does. But other than that, I really wanted to keep it to the things that I think matter most. People can judge whether I did a good job or not, but that was my decision.
But do we know how we died? The short answer? No, we don’t. Now, if I had to guess, I would say killing Navalny during the Munich Security Conference in the middle of a debate over $60 billion in Ukraine funding, maybe the Russians are dumb. I didn’t get that vibe at all. I don’t see it. But maybe they killed him. I mean, they certainly put him in prison, which I’m against. But here’s what I do know is that we don’t know. And so when Chuck Schumer stands up and [inaudible 00:21:42]. Joe Biden reads some card in front of him with lines about Navalny, it’s like, I’m allowed to laugh at that because it’s absurd. You don’t know.
And I just dismissed that completely out of hand as stupid and actually a slander against my country, but it turned out to all be true or substantially true anyway. And that’s been a real shock for me in middle age to understand that. But anyway, as to Navalny, look, I don’t know. But we should always proceed on the basis of what we do know, which is to say on the basis of truth, knowable truth. And if you have an entire policymaking apparatus that is making the biggest decisions on the face of the planet, on the basis of things that are bullshit or lies, you’re going to get bad outcomes every time, every time. And that’s why we are where we are.
And there’s a lot to love, the culture that produced Tolstoy. It’s not a gas station with nuclear weapons. Sorry. Only a moron would say that. It’s a very deep culture. I don’t fully understand it, of course, but I admire it. Who wouldn’t? But I asked him, “What’s it like living here?” And he goes, “It’s great. Moscow is a great city indisputably.” He said, “You don’t want to get involved in Russian politics.” And I said, “Why?” He said, “Well, you could get hurt. You could wind up like Navalny if you did. But also, it’s just too complicated.”
The Russian mind is not exactly the same… It’s Western, it’s a European city, but it’s not quite European. And the way they think is very, very complex. Very complex. It’s too complicated. Just don’t get involved. And I would just say two things. One, I’m not sure. I mean, I don’t know, but my strong sense is that Navalny’s death, whoever did it, probably didn’t have a lot to do with the coming election in Russia. My sense from talking to Putin and the people around him is they’re not really focused on that. In fact, I asked one of his top advisors, “When’s the election?” And she looked at me completely confused. She didn’t know the date of the election. Okay. She’s like March.
And I asked a bunch of other people just in Moscow, “Who’s Putin running against?” Nobody knew. So it’s not a real election in the sense that we would recognize at all. Second, I was really struck by so many things in Moscow and really deeply bothered by a lot of things that I saw there. But one thing I noticed was the total absence of cult of personality propaganda, which I expected to see and have seen around the world. Jordan, for example, I don’t know if you’ve been to Jordan, but go to Jordan. In every building, there are pictures of the king and his extended family, and that’s a sign of political insecurity.
You don’t create a cult of personality unless you’re personally insecure. And also, unless you’re worried about losing your grip and power. None of that. It’s interesting. And I expected to see a lot of it, like statues of Putin. No. There are no statues of anybody other than Christian saints. I’m not quite sure. I’m just reporting what I saw. So yes, in a political sense. It’s not a free country. It’s not a democracy in the way that we would understand it or I don’t want to live there because I like to say what I think. In fact, I make my living doing it. But it’s not Stalinist in a recognizable way. And anyone who says it is should go there and tell me how.
And I said, “Well, I don’t recognize the legitimacy of that actually, because I’m American and I’ve lived here my whole life. And that’s so outrageous that I’m happy to face that risk because I so reject the premise. Okay, I’m an American. I should be able to talk to anyone I want to, and I plan to exercise that freedom, which I think I was born with.” And I gave them this long lecture. They’re like, “We’re just lawyers.” But that was… Let me put it this way, I don’t know how much you’ve dealt with lawyers, but it costs many thousands of dollars to get a conclusion like that. They sent a whole bunch of their summer associates or whatever.
They put a lot of people on this question, checked a lot of precedent, and they sent me a 10-page memo on it, and their sincere conclusion was, “Do not do this.” And of course, it made me mad. So I was lecturing on the phone and I had another call with a head lawyer and he said, “Well, look, a lot will depend on the questions that you ask Putin. If you’re seen as too nice to him, you could get arrested when you come back.” And I was like, “You’re describing a fascist country. Okay. You’re saying that the US government will arrest me if I don’t ask the questions they want asked, is that what’s you’re saying?” “Well, we just think based on what’s happened, that that’s possible.” And so I’m just telling you what happened.
And I know that because two New York Times reporters, one of whom I actually like a lot, said and called other people. “Oh, he’s going to interview Putin.” I hadn’t told anybody that, like anybody. My wife, two producers, that’s it. So they got that from the government. Then I’m over there, and of course I want to see Snowden, who I admire. And so we have a mutual friend. So I got his text and come on over, and Snowden does not want publicity at all. But I really wanted to have dinner with him. So we had dinner in my hotel room at the Four Seasons in Moscow, and I tried to convince him, “I’d love to do an interview, shoot it on my iPhone.” I’d-
I’m not guessing, because I spent my entire life in that world, 33 years, I worked in big news companies and so I know how it works. I know the people involved in it. I could name them, Ben Smith of Semaphore, among many others and I find that really objectionable, not just on principle either, in effect, in practice, I don’t want to live in that kind of country. People externalize all of their anxiety about this I have noticed. So it’s like Russia is not free. Yeah, I know. Neither is Burkina Faso, most countries aren’t free actually, but we are. We’re the United States. We’re different. That’s my concern. Preserving that is my concern. They get so exercised about what’s happening in other parts of the world, places they’ve never been, know nothing about, it’s almost a way of ignoring what’s happening in their own country right around them. I find it so strange and sad and weird.
If state actors are involved, you can keep whatever the Malaysian mafia from reading your texts probably. You cannot keep the big Intel services from reading your texts, it’s not possible, any of them, or listening to your calls. That was the firm conclusion of people who’ve been involved in it for a long time, decades, in both cases. I just thought, you know what, I don’t care. I don’t care. I’m not sending a ton of naked pictures of myself to anybody.
No, I’m serious. It does. It was, I don’t know, five or six years ago we went to North Korea, and my phone started acting crazy. I talked to someone on the National Security Council, actually who called me about this, somehow knew that your phone is being surveilled by the South Korean government. I was like, “I like the South Korean government. Why would they do that?” Because they want more information, they thought I was talking to Trump or whatever. But I could tell because all of a sudden the thing would just drain in like 45 minutes so that’s a downside.
I don’t care what you tell me. I don’t care what you claim you represent. I don’t care about the ideas or the systems that you say you embody. It’s dogs barking to me. How’s your life expectancy? How’s your suicide rate? What’s drug use like? Are people having children? Are people’s children more likely to live in a free or more prosperous society than you did and their grandparents did? Those are the only measures that matter to me, the rest is a lie. But anyway, the point is we just get so obsessed with the theater around people or people, and we miss the bigger things that are happening and we allow ourselves to be deceived into thinking that what doesn’t matter at all matters, that moral victories are all that matters. No, actually, facts on the ground victories matter more than anything. You certainly see it in this country. Black Lives Matter, for example, how many black people did that help? It hurt a lot of black people, but in the end, we should be able to measure it.
How many black people have died by gunfire in the four years since George Floyd died? Well, the number’s gone way, way up and that was a Black Lives Matter operation, defund the police. So I think we can say as a factual matter, data-based matter, Black Lives Matter didn’t help black people and if it did tell me how. “Well, these are important moral victories.” I’m over that. That’s just another lie, a long litany of lies. So I try to see the rest of the world that way. But more than anything, I try to see world events through the lens of an American because I am one. And what does this mean for us? It’s not even the war, it’s the sanctions that will forever change the United States, our standard of living, the way our government operates. That more than any single thing in my lifetime screwed the United States. Levying those sanctions in the way that we did was crazy. For me, the main takeaway from my eight days in Moscow was not Putin. He’s a leader, whatever. None of them are that different actually, in my pretty extensive experience, no, it was Moscow. That blew my mind. I was not prepared for that at all and I thought I knew a lot about Moscow. My dad worked there on and off in the 80s and 90s because, a US government employee. And he was always coming back, “Moscow, it’s a nightmare,” and all this stuff, “no electricity.” I got there almost exactly two years after sanctions, totally cut off from Western financial systems, kicked out of Swift, can’t use US dollars, no banking, no credit cards. And that city just factually, I’m not endorsing the system, I’m not endorsing the whole country. I didn’t go to Lake Baikal. I didn’t go to Turkmenistan. I just went to Moscow, largest city in Europe, 13 million people. I drove all around it and that city is way nicer, outwardly anyway, I don’t live there, than any city we have by a lot.
And by nicer, let me be specific. No graffiti. No homeless. No people using drugs in the street. Totally tidy. No garbage on the ground. And no forest of steel and concrete soul- destroying buildings, none of the postmodern architecture that oppresses us without even our knowledge. None of that crap. It’s a truly beautiful city. That’s not an endorsement of Putin. By the way, it didn’t make me love Putin, it made me hate my own leaders because I grew up in a country that had cities kind of like that, that were nice cities that were safe, and we don’t have that anymore. How did that happen? Did Putin do that? I don’t think Putin did that actually. I think the people in charge of that, the mayors, the governors, the president, they did that and they should be held accountable for it.
No, that matters almost more than anything, actually. We can have both. The normal regime defenders and morons, John Stewart or whatever he’s calling himself, they’re like, “Whoa, that’s the price of freedom.” People shitting on the sidewalk is the price of freedom. It’s like you can’t fool me because I’ve lived here for 54 years, I know that it’s not the price of freedom because I lived in a country that was both free and clean and orderly. So that’s not a trade off I think I have to make. That is the beauty of being a little bit older because you’re like, no, I remember that, actually. It wasn’t what you’re saying. We didn’t have racial segregation in 1985. It was a really nice country that respected itself. I was here. I think with younger people, you can tell them that and they’re like, well, 1985 you were selling slaves in Madison Square Garden. It’s like, no, they weren’t. You’re going to Madison Square Garden and not stepping over a single fentanyl addict.
It’s not something that just appears organically. I wrote a book about crime 30 years ago. I thought a lot about this. You have as much crime as you put up with, period. It doesn’t make you less free to not tolerate murder. In fact, it makes you unfree to have a lot of murders. But it makes me sad that people are like, “I can’t live in New York City anymore because of inflation and filth and illegal aliens and people shooting each other, but I’m glad because this is vibrant and strong and free.” It’s like that’s not freedom actually, at all.
Okay, so again, this is commentary in the United States and our policymakers, why are we doing this? It’s forcing the rest of the world into a block against us called bricks. They’re getting off the US dollar. That will mean a lot of dollars are going to come back here and destroy our economy and impoverish this country. So the consequences, the stakes are really high. They’re huge and we’re not even hurting Russia. What the hell are we doing, one. On the subway, that Subway was built by Joseph Stalin right before the second World War. I’m not endorsing Stalin, obviously. Stalinism is a thing that I hate and I don’t want to come to my country. I’m making the obvious point that for over 80 years you’ve had these frescoes and chandeliers, maybe they’ve been redone or whatever, but somehow the society has been able to not destroy what its ancestors built, the things that are worth having, and there are a lot. Why don’t we have that?
Even on a much more terrestrial plane, why can’t I have a subway station like that? Why can’t my children who live in New York City ride the subway? A lot of people I know who live in New York City are afraid to ride the subway, young women especially. That’s freedom? No, again, it’s slavery. If Putin can do this, why can’t we? What? This is so obvious. I’m a traitor? Okay, so if I’m calling for American citizens to demand more from their government and higher standards for their own society, and remember that just 30 years ago, we had a much different and much happier and cleaner and healthier society where everyone wasn’t fat with diabetes at 40 from poisoned food, I’m not a traitor to my country, I’m a defender of my country. By the way, the people calling me a traitor, they’re all like, whatever. I would not say they’re people who put America’s interest first to put it mildly.
I would just recommend to everyone watching this, if you’re really interested, if you’re one of those people, and I’m not one, but who’s waking up every day and you’ve got a Ukrainian flag on your mailbox or whatever, your Ukrainian lapel pin, or this absurd theater, but if you sincerely care about Ukraine or Russia or whatever, why don’t you just hop on a plane for 800 bucks and go see it? That doesn’t occur to anyone to do that. I know it’s time consuming and kind of expensive, sort of, not really, but you benefit so much. I could bore you for eight hours, and I know you’ve had this experience, where you think you know what something is or you think you know who someone is, and then you have direct experience of that place or person and you realize all your preconceptions were totally wrong. They were controlled by somebody else. In fact, I won’t betray confidences, but off the air we were talking about somebody and you said, “I couldn’t believe the person was not at all what I thought.” Well, that’s happened to me-
Here’s my point. The idea that a whole group of people is just evil because of their blood, I just don’t believe that. I think it’s immoral to think that, and I can just tell you my own experience after eight days there. I think it’s a really interesting culture, Slavic culture, which is shared by the way, by Russian and Ukraine, of course, they’re first cousins at the most distant. I found them really smart and interesting and informed. I didn’t understand a lot of what they were saying. I don’t understand the way their minds work because I’m American, but it wasn’t a thin culture, it’s a thick culture and I admire that. I wish I could go to Ukraine. I would go tomorrow.
We don’t have to live like animals. We can live with dignity. Even the Russians can do it. That’s kind of what I was saying. Even the Russians under Vladimir freaking Putin can live like this. No, it’s not a feature of dictatorship. That’s the most, I think, discouraging and most dishonest line by people like Jon Stewart who really are trying to prepare the population for accepting a lot less. He is really a tool of the regime in a sinister way, always has been like, “How dare you expect that? What are you, a Stalinist?” It’s like, no, I’m an American. I’m a decent person. I just want to be able to walk to the grocery store without being murdered. Is that too much? “Shut up, you don’t believe in freedom.” It’s really dark if you think about it.
But they go along with things. You are not allowed, if you stand up at any cable channel, any cable channel in the United States and say, “Wait a second, how did the Ukrainian government throw a U.S. citizen into prison until he died for criticizing the Ukrainian government? We’re paying for that. That’s why it’s offensive to me. We’re paying for it. That happens all the time around the world, of course. But this is a U.S. citizen and we’re paying the pensions of Ukrainian bureaucrats. We are the Ukrainian government at this point. If you said that on TV on any channel, well, you’d lose your job for that.
Norway is at the top. Really, Norway? If I went to Norwegian television and said NATO blew up Nord Stream, which it did, NATO blew up Nord Stream, the United States government with the help of other governments blew up, committed the largest act of industrial terrorism in history, and by the way, the largest environmental crime, the largest emission of CO2, methane, could I keep my job? No. So how is that a free press?
Crossfire was stupid. Crossfire didn’t help. Crossfire framed everything as Republican versus Democrat, whatever. It was not helpful to the public discourse. I couldn’t agree more, and that’s why I left. So that was part of his critique, fair. I’m not sure I would’ve admitted it at the time because I worked there and it’s sort of hard to admit you’re engaged in an enterprise that’s fundamentally worthless, which it was. But his other point was that I was somehow a partisan or a mindless partisan, which is definitely not true. It is true of him. He is a mindless partisan, but I’m not.
I really haven’t been since I got back from Baghdad at the beginning of the Iraq War, and I realized that the Republican party, which I’d voted for my whole life to that point, and had supported in general, was pushing this really horrible thing that was going to hurt the United States, which in time it really did. The Iraq War really hurt the United States. I realized that I had been on the wrong side of that. I said so publicly immediately from Baghdad, I said that to the New York Times and I really meant it. I mean it now. So to call me partisan, you can call me stupid, you can call me wrong, I certainly had been wrong, but partisan, I just didn’t think it was a meaningful… I mean, that’s just not true. It’s the opposite of true.
So I didn’t really take it seriously at all, and I never thought much of him. So I was like, “Whatever. Some buffoon jumping around on my show grandstanding.” By the way, that happened right at the moment that YouTube began. I think that was one of the first big YouTube, it was one of the first big YouTube videos. So it had a virality that, if that’s a word, it went everywhere in a way that didn’t used to happen in cable news. I mean, by that point, that was 20 years ago as you point out, I’ve been in cable news for nine years. So before 2004, we would say something on television and then it would be lost. People could claim they heard it, but you’d have to go to I think the University of Tennessee at Knoxville archives to get it.
Suddenly everything we said would live forever on the internet, which is good, by the way. That’s not bad. But it was a big change for me, and I just couldn’t believe how widely that was discussed at the time, because I thought he was not an interesting person, I think he’s obviously a very unhappy person. I just didn’t take him seriously then and I don’t now. But so anyway, that was it. It was a smaller thing in my life at the time than other people imagined.
So I think that people who bring that level of intensity to politics are, by definition, bitter, by definition, disappointed, bitter in the way the disappointed people are. That the real questions are like what happens when you die and how do the people around you feel about you? Those are not the only questions in life, but they’re certainly the most important ones. If we’re spending a disproportionate amount of time on who gets elected to some office, not that it’s irrelevant, it is relevant, but it’s not the eternal question. So I feel like he’s not the only kind of bitter silly person in Washington or in its orbit. There are many, and a lot of them are Republicans, so.
But I just thought it was ironic. I mean, everything’s ironic to me, but being called a Russia’s sympathizer by a guy who calls himself Boris, it just made me laugh. No one else has ever laughed at that. Boris Johnson’s real name is not Boris, as you know. He calls himself Boris. It’s his middle name. So if you call yourself Boris, you don’t really have standing to attack anyone else as a Russia defender, right? I think that’s funny. No one else, as I noted does. But Jon Stewart, there are a lot of things you could say about me, but he’s much more partisan than I am. So to call me a partisan, it’s like what?
But if you’re going to pretend to be the guy who’s giving the finger to entrenched power, you should do it once in a while, and he never has. There’s not one time when he said something that would be deeply unpopular on Morning Joe. That’s all I’m saying. So don’t call yourself a truth teller. You’re a court comedian or a flatterer of power. Okay, that’s fine. There’s a role for that, but don’t pretend to be something else.
I remember thinking, “Well, that’s kind of weird. That’s not what I remember.” Then I realized, no, Jon Stewart was more popular than I was, therefore he was recorded as the winner. That was hard for me to accept, because that struck me as unfair. You should rate any contest on points. Here are the rules. We’re going to judge the contest in the basis of those rules. No, in the end, it’s just like the more popular guy wins. Every TV critic like Jon Stewart, every one of them hated me, therefore he won. I was like, “Wow, I guess I have to accept that reality.” You do, like the reality of the sunrise. You’re not in charge of it. So that’s just what it is.
The fact that we’ve a carried interest loophole in the tax code and people are claiming that their income is investment, income and they’re paying half the tax rate as someone who just goes to work every day, it discourages work. It encourages lending at interest, which I think is gross, personally. I’m against it. Sorry. The fact that we’re creating chaos around the world is the saddest thing that’s happening right now. Nobody feels free to say that. So that’s not good.
So I didn’t push it, but I thought it was really interesting. Because, of course, Putin knows my views on Joe Biden. He knew I applied to the CIA, so they’ve done some digging on me, but he didn’t mention it, and he didn’t attack NATO. The reason is, I know for a fact, because he wants a settlement. He wants a settlement not because Russia’s about to collapse despite the lying of our media, that’s just not true, and no one is even saying it anymore because it’s so dumb. He wants to because it’s just bad to have a war. It changes the world in ways you can’t predict. People die. Everything about it is sad. If you can avoid it, you should.
So I would like to see a settlement where, look, the thing that Russia wants and I think probably has a right to is not to have NATO missiles on its border. I don’t know why we would do that. I don’t know what we get out of it. I just don’t even understand it. I don’t understand the purpose of NATO. I don’t think NATO is good for the United States. I think it’s an attack on our sovereignty. I would pull out of NATO immediately if I were the U.S. president, because I don’t think it helps the U.S. I know a lot of people are getting their bread buttered by NATO. But anyway, that’s my view as an American.
If I’m a Russian or a Ukrainian, let’s just be sovereign countries now. We’re not run by the U.S. State Department. We’re just our own countries. I believe in sovereignty, okay? So that’s my view. I also want to say one thing about Zelensky. I attacked him before because I was so offended by his cavalier talk about nuclear exchange because it would kill my family. So I’m really offended by that. Anyone who talks that way I’m offended by. But I do feel for Zelensky. I do. He didn’t run for president to have this happen.
I think Zelensky’s been completely misused by the State Department, by Toria Nuland, by our Secretary of State, by the policymakers in the U.S. who’ve used Ukraine as a vessel for their ambitions, their geopolitical ambitions, but also the many American businesses who’ve used Ukraine as a way to fleece the American taxpayer, and then by just independent ghouls like Boris Johnson who are hoping to get rich from interviews on it. The whole thing, Zelensky is at the center of this. He’s not driving history. NATO and the United States is driving history. Putin is driving history. There’s this guy, Zelensky. So I do feel for him, and I think he’s in a perilous place.
The first is caring about the people you lead, that’s number one. In the way a father cares for his children, or an officer cares for his troops. A president should care for his people. That leads inexorably to the next requirement, which is bravery, physical courage. I believe in that. I’m not like some tough guy, but I just think it’s obvious. If you’re in charge, I’m at my house and I feel like someone broke in, I’m not going to say to my wife, “Hey, baby, go deal with the home invasion.” I’m going to deal with it because I’m dad. Okay? So if you’re the president of a country and your capital city is attacked, as ours was at the Pentagon, and you run away?
“The Secret Service told me to.” Bitch, are you in charge? Who’s daddy here? The Secret Service? Do you know what I mean? I found that totally contemptible and I said so, and man, did I get a lecture, not just from Republicans, but from Democrats. “Oh, you don’t know. Put yourself in that position.” I was like, “Okay.” I don’t know what I would do under that kind of stress, enormous stress. I get it. I know one thing I wouldn’t do is run away because you can’t do that. If you’re not willing to die for your country, then you shouldn’t be leading it. So yes, to the extent, if Zelensky really is in Ukraine most of the time, amen.
Okay. Putin doesn’t like nationalist Ukrainians. Putin hates nationalism in general, which is interesting. Of course he does. He’s got 80 whatever republics, and he’s afraid of nationalist movements. He fought a war in Chechnya over this. So I understand it, but I have a different… I’m for nationalism, I’m for American nationalism, so I disagree with Putin on that. But calling them Nazis, it’s like, I thought it was childish.
He’s speaking to multiple audiences around the world. I’m not sure what he hoped to achieve by that interview, I will never know. But I did think that, this guy is not good at telling his story. And I also think honestly on the base of a lot… I mean, I know this. Very isolated during COVID, very.
We keep hearing that he’s dying of this or that disease, “He’s got ALS. I mean, I don’t know, I’m not his doctor. There’s a ton of lying about it, I know that. But one thing that’s not a lie, is that he was cloistered away during COVID, I know this, and only dealing with two or three people. And that makes you weird, it’s so important to deal with a lot of people to have your views challenged. And you see this with leaders who stay in power too long. He’s been in power 24 years, effectively. There’s been upsides I think for Russia, the Russian economy, Russian life expectancy, but there are definitely downsides. And one of them is you get weird, and you get autocratic, this is why we have term limits. Very few kings don’t get crazy in old age.
And George W. Bush to his credit is like, “Well, that seems like kind of an innovative good idea.” And Condi Rice, who’s one of the stupidest people ever to hold power in the United States, if I can say. Who’s monomaniacally anti-Russia because she had an advisor at Stanford who was, or something during the Cold War, “No, we can’t do that.” And Bush is just weak and so he agreed, it’s like, “What? That is crazy.” If you’re fighting with someone and the person says, “You know what? Actually our interests align. And you’ve spent 80% of your mental disc space on hating me and opposing me or whatever, but actually we can be on the same team.” If you don’t at least see that as progress, what?
If your interest is in helping your country, what’s the counter argument? I don’t even understand it. And no one has even addressed any of this, “The war of Russian aggression.” Yeah, it was a war of Russian aggression, for sure. But how did we get there? We got there because Joe Biden and Tony Blinken dispatched Kamala Harris, who does not freelance this stuff, fair to say, to the Munich Security Conference two years ago this month, February 2022. And said in a press conference to Zelenskyy, poor Zelenskyy, “We want you to join NATO.” This was not in a backroom, this was in public at a press conference, knowing because he said it 4,000 times, “We don’t want nuclear weapons from the United States or NATO on our western border.” Duh. And days later, he invaded. So what is that?
And I raised that question in my previous job, and I was denounced as of course a traitor or something. But okay, great, I’m a traitor. What’s the answer? What’s the answer? Toria Nuland, who I know, not dumb, hasn’t helped the US in any way, an architect of the Iraq war, architect of this disaster, one of the people who destroyed the US dollar. Okay, fine, but you’re not stupid. So you’re trying to get a war by acting that way, what’s the other explanation? By the way, NATO didn’t want Ukraine because it didn’t meet the criteria for admission. So why would you say that? Because you want a war, that’s why. And that war has enriched a lot of people to the tune of billions. So I don’t care if I sound like some kind of left-wing conspiracy nut, because I’m neither left-wing nor a conspiracy nut. Tell me how I’m wrong.
I mean, the receptionist in my office in 1991 was getting a master’s in Russian from Georgetown, he was going to be a Sovietologist. And he was among thousands of people in Washington on that same track. And so the Soviet Union collapses, well, so does the rationale for a good portion of the US government, has been dedicated for over 40 years to opposing this thing that no longer exists. So there’s a lot of forward momentum, there’s a huge amount of money, the bulk of the money in the richest country in the world, aimed in this direction. And it’s very hard for people to readjust, to reassess. And you see this in life all the time.
I love my wife, all of a sudden she ran off with my best friend. Holy shit, I didn’t expect that this morning, now it’s a reality, how do I deal with that? Well, I got Stage 4 cancer diagnosis, and it’s all bad, but just saying that’s the nature of life. Things that you did not anticipate, never thought you’d have to face, happen out of nowhere, and you have to adjust your expectations and your goals. And people have a hard time with that, very hard time with that. So that’s a lot of it.
If you’re Condi Rice, sort of highly ambitious mid-wit, who gets this degree from Stanford, and you read Tolstoy in the original, sure you did. And you spent your whole life thinking that Russia is the center of evil in the world, it’s kind of hard to be like, “Well, actually there’s a new threat, and it’s coming from farther east. It’s primarily an economic threat.” And maybe all the threats aren’t reduced to tank battles, that’s the other thing. Is these people are so inelastic in their thinking, so lacking imagination and flexibility, that they can’t sort of imagine a new framework. And the new framework is not that you’re going to go to war with China over Formosa, Taiwan. No, the framework is that all of a sudden all the infrastructure in Tijuana is going to be built by China, and that’s a different kind of threat. But they can’t kind of get there because they’re not that impressive.
And it appeals to Republican voters, unfortunately. That every problem is the result of weakness. Everyone’s Chamberlain, Germany never would’ve gone in to Poland, Czechoslovakia if England had been stronger, that’s the argument. Is that true? I don’t know, actually. Maybe, it might be totally true, it might not be true at all, I really don’t know. But not everything is that, that’s not always true. If I go up to you in a bar and I say, “I hate your neck tie.” I’m being pretty aggressive with you, pretty strong. You might beat the shit out of me actually, or shoot me if I do that. An aggressive posture doesn’t always get you the outcome that you want. Sometimes it requires a more sophisticated Mediterranean posture. I mean, it kind of depends, it’s a time and place thing. And they don’t acknowledge that, everything is this same template, and that’s not the road to good decision making at all.
But the problem is, from my perspective, as someone who’s trying to think of a follow-up and listen to the answer, Putin will talk, and you can in part of your ear hear the Slavic sounds, and then over that is a guy with a Slavic accent speaking English. And then you can hear Putin stop talking, and then this guy’s answer goes on for another 15, 20 seconds. So it’s super disconcerting, and it’s really hard.
And the other thing is, it doesn’t matter how good your translators are. I’m interested in language, I speak only English fluently, but I’m really interested in language, and I work in language. It doesn’t matter how good your translator is, in literature and in conversation you miss so much if the language is moving… I mean, you see this in Bible study, you see it in Dostoevsky, you see it everywhere. If you don’t speak Aramaic, Hebrew, Russian, you’re not really getting… I mean, even in romance languages. I like Balzac, who obviously wrote in French. You read Père Goriot, it’s an amazing novel, hilarious, and you’re not really getting it. And it’s not that French and English are not that far apart. Russian, what?
And I said earlier that I think that the desire for power and money will kill you, and I believe that, and I’ve seen it a lot. But I also think the desire for the love of people you don’t know is every bit as poisonous, maybe more so. And so, yes. And it’s not just because I’ve obviously spent most of my life in public. And in fact, I don’t spend my life in public, and I’m a completely private person. But professionally, I’ve spent my life in public. It’s not just that, it’s social media makes everybody into a cable news host. And we were talking off the air, my new… I’m obsessed with this. I don’t know enough about it, but here’s what I do know. South Korea, amazing country, great people. I grew up around Koreans, probably no group, if I can generalize about a group, that I like more than Koreans, are just smart, funny, honest, brave. I really like Koreans, I always have, my whole life, growing up in sunny California with Koreans.
South Korea is dying, it’s literally dying. It’s way below replacement rate in fertility, its suicide rate is astronomical. Why is that? It’s a rich country. Of course, I don’t know the answer. But I suspect it has something to do with the penetration of technology into South Korean society, is I think certainly one of the highest in the world, people live online there. And there was a belief for a bunch of reasons in South Korea that western technology would be a liberating progressive force, and I think it’s been the opposite. It’s my sense, strong sense. And I think it’s true in this country too. And I don’t understand how people can ignore the decline in life expectancy or the rise in fentanyl use. It’s not just about China shipping precursor chemicals to Mexico, it’s like, “Why would you take that shit?”
Do you shoot him or do you wait to get shot? Because all the data, look, he hasn’t shot you. He’s not committed a crime other than carrying a weapon in New York City. But maybe he’s got a license. You don’t know. It could be legal, but he’s pointing a gun at you. Is it fair to kill him before he kills you, even though you can’t prove that he will kill you?
I want, but I don’t want to go on TV and say that’s a rigged election because I don’t have any evidence it’s a rigged election. You can’t do that. It’s irresponsible and it’s wrong. So I was like, the Trump campaign was making all these claims about this or that fraud. So I was trying my best to substantiate them, to follow up on it. Everyone was like, “Shut up, Trump, you lost. Go away. We’re going to indict you.” But I felt like my job was to be like, no, the guy’s, he’s president, he’s claiming the election just got stolen and he’s making these claims. Let’s see if we can… Well, the people around him were so incompetent. It was just absolutely crazy. And so I called a couple of times, I finally give up, but I’d call and be like, “All right, you guys claim that these inconsistencies and this whatever, this happened, give me evidence and I’ll put it on TV.” It’s my job to bring stuff that is not going to be aired anywhere else to the public. It was insane how incompetent and unserious-
Because they all lie, because their job is to get elected or whatever. So I’m very wary of campaigns having been around it for 30 years, but I made an exception to my rule and I got a bunch of stuff from them. Well, of the six names, two of them are still alive. What? I immediately corrected it the next night. CNN did a whole segment on how I was spreading disinformation, which I was by the way. In this one case, they were right. I was so mad. I was like, “I hate you. I’m not talking about you. I’m so mad.” Anyway, that’s the answer. That’s what that was.
But I got bullied into it by a lawyer… I didn’t get bullied into it. I was weak enough to agree with a lawyer. It was my fault. Never should have done that. “Fuck you. They’re my texts.” I’m not even named in this case. That’s what I should have said, but I didn’t. I said I was mad on the air the next day, but not in language that colorful, but whatever. I try to be transparent. I mean, I also think, by the way, if you watch someone over time, you don’t always know what they really think, but you can tell if someone’s lying. You can sort of feel it in people. And I have lied. I’m sure I’ll lie again. I don’t want to lie. I don’t think I’m a liar. I try not to be a liar. I don’t want to be a liar. I think it’s really important not to be a liar.
They have to have all information that they want, whether the people in charge want it or don’t want it or think it’s true or think it’s false, it doesn’t matter. And the second you don’t have that, you don’t have a democracy. It’s not a free election, period. And that’s very clear in other countries, I guess. But it’s not clear here. But I would say it’s this election that… It took me a while to come to this, but it’s this election that’s the referendum on democracy. Biden is senile. He’s literally senile. He can’t talk, he can’t walk. The whole world knows that, leave our borders. Everybody in the world knows it.
A senile man is not going to get elected in the most powerful country in the world unless there’s fraud, period. Who would vote for a senile man? He literally can’t talk. And nobody I’ve ever met thinks he’s running the US government because he’s not. And so I think the world is looking on at this coming election and saying… And a lot of the world hates Trump. Okay, it’s not an endorsement of Trump, but it’s just true. If Joe Biden gets reelected, democracy is a freaking joke. That’s just true.
So it’s really substantially about the money. It’s not ideological. It’s about the money. And if someone controls the federal government, I mean at this point, it’s the most powerful organization in human history. It’s kind of hard to fight that. And in the case of Trump, I know the answer there. They raided Mar-a-Lago. They indicted him on bullshit charges. And I felt that in myself too. Even I was like, come on, come on. Whatever you think of Trump… And I agreed with his immigration views and I really like Trump personally. I think he’s hilarious and interesting, which he is. But it’s like, okay, there are a lot of people in this country.
At the very least, let’s have a real debate. The second… Messed up your cameras there, sorry, I’m getting excited. But the second they rated Mar-a-Lago on a documents charge, as someone from DC I was like, I know a lot about classification and all this stuff and been around it a lot. That’s so absurd that I was like, now it’s not about Trump, it’s about our system continuing. If you can take out a presidential candidate on a fake charge, use the justice system to take the guy out of the race, then we don’t have a representative democracy anymore. And I think a lot of Republican voters felt that way. If they hadn’t indicted him, I’m not sure he would be the nominee. I really don’t think he would be.
That’s honestly the only reason. I was like, live in foreign countries, see history happen. I’m for that. I applied to the Operations Directorate. They turned me down on the basis of drug use actually. True. But anyway, whatever. I was unsuited for it so I’m glad they turned me down. But the point is I didn’t see CIA as a threat, partly because I was bathing in propaganda about CIA and I didn’t really understand what it was and didn’t want to know. But second, because my impression at the time was it was outwardly focused. It was focused on our enemies. I don’t have a problem with that as much. The fact that CIA is playing in domestic politics and actually has for a long time, was involved in the Kennedy assassination, that’s not speculation. That’s a fact. And I confirmed that from someone who had read their documents that are still not public, it’s shocking.
You can’t have that. And the reason I’m so mad is I really believe in the idea of representative government. Acknowledging its imperfections, but I should have some say, I live here, I’m a citizen. I pay all your freaking taxes. So the fact that they would be tampering with American democracy is so outrageous to me. And I don’t know why Morning Joe is not outraged. This parade of dummies, highly credentialed dummies they have on Morning Joe every day. That doesn’t bother them at all. How could that not bother you? Why is only Glenn Greenwald mad about it? I mean, it’s confirmed. It’s not like a fever dream. It’s real. They played in the last election domestically, and I guess it shows how dumb I am because they’ve been doing that for many years. I mean, the guy who took out Mosaddegh lived on my street. One of the Roosevelts, CIA officer.
So I mean, again, I grew up around this stuff, but I never really thought… I never reached the obvious conclusion, which is that if the US government subverts democracy in other countries in the name of democracy, it will over time subvert democracy in my country. Why wouldn’t it? That is, the corruption is like core. It’s at the root of it. The purpose of the CIA was envisioned, at least publicly envisioned, as an intel gathering apparatus for the executive so the president could make wise foreign policy decisions. What the hell is happening in Country X? I don’t know. Let me call the agency in charge of finding out. The point wasn’t to freaking guarantee the outcome of elections.
And it’s very unwise for… I’m not a huge fan of treaties. Some are fine, too many bad. But I think US aid, military aid to Israel and the implied security guarantees, some explicit, but many implied, security guarantees of the United States to Israel probably haven’t helped Israel that much long-term. It’s a rich country with a highly capable population. Like every other country, it’s probably best if it makes its decisions based on what it can do by itself. So I would definitely be concerned if I lived in Israel because I think fair or unfair-
But now it’s not possible. If you had a coalition of countries against Israel, I know Israel has nuclear weapons and has a capable military and all that and the backing of the United States, but it’s a small country, I think I’d be very worried. So there’s that. I don’t see any advantage to the United States. I mean, I think it’s important for each country to make its own decisions.
So I just don’t have any confidence in those leaders to… When was the last time they improved another country? Can you think of that? Oh, the Marshall Plan. Well, you look at Europe now and you’re like, “I don’t know if that worked.” But even if it did work, again 80 years ago. So when was the last country American foreign policy makers improved? Netanyahu’s in a very difficult place, politically impossible. I mean, I’m glad I’m not Netanyahu, and I’m not sure he’s capable of making wise long-term decisions anyway. But if I was just an Israeli, I’d be like, “I don’t know if I want all this help and guidance.”
So yeah, I actually think it’s worse than just having just returned from the Middle East and talking to a lot of pretty open-minded sort of pro-Israeli Arabs who want stability above all. The merchant class always wants stability. So I’m on their side, I guess. They’re like, “Man, this could get super ugly super fast.” American leadership is completely absent. It’s just all posturing. People like Nikki Haley, you just wonder how does an advanced civilization promote someone like Nikki Haley to a position of authority? It’s like what? Adults are talking. Adults are talking. Nikki Haley, please go away.
That would be the appropriate response. But everyone’s so intimidated to be like, “Oh, she’s a strong woman.” She’s so transparently weak and sort of ridiculous and doesn’t know anything, and it’s just thinks that jumping up and down and making these absurd blanket statements, repeating bumper stickers just like leadership or something. It’s like a self-confident advanced society would never allow Nikki Haley to advance. I mean, she’s really not impressive. Sorry.
This weird kind of group think, it’s almost like fourth grade, there’s always some little girl in the front row who’s like acting as kind of the teacher’s enforcer. Whip around and be like, “Sit down. Didn’t you hear Mrs. Johnson said sit down.” It’s like the whole American media, “How dare you ask that question?” Rogan just seems like completely on his own trip. He doesn’t even hear it. He’s like, “Well, really where the pyramids built?” I was like, “Oh, I love that.”
Your choices matter. If I smoke a lot, I get lung cancer. If I use fentanyl, I may OD. Got it. If I don’t exercise, I might get fat, okay. But on a bigger scale, you’re not only the sum total of your choices. Things happen to you that you didn’t deserve, good and bad. Marriages, and I’ll speak for myself, in my case, just one of them. I mean, clearly spending time with the person you’re married to, talking, enjoying each other. I have a lot of rituals. We have a lot of rituals that ensure that. But in 40 years, you’re like a different person.
I did drugs. I was drinking all the time when we met. It’s been a long time since I’ve done that. I’m very different and so is she, but we’re different in ways that are complementary and happy. We’ve never been happier. So how do we pull that off? Just kind of good luck, honestly. Then I see other people… No, I’m not kidding. But that’s true. I think it’s so important not to flatter yourself if you’ve been successful at something. The thing I’ve been most successful at is marriage, but it’s not really me. I mean, I haven’t-
I was thinking actually this morning in my sauna, of all the people I’ve interviewed or met, this is someone I’ve never interviewed, but I have talked to him a couple of times, the greatest leader I’ve ever met in the world is literally a king. It’s MB Sheikh Mohammed of Abu Dhabi, who is Muslim. I’m definitely not Muslim. I’m Christian, Protestant Christian. So I don’t agree with his religion and I don’t agree with monarchies, but he’s the best leader in the world that I’ve ever met, and by far, it’s not even close. Why is that? Well, I could bore you for an hour on the subject, but the reason that he’s such a good leader is because he’s guided by an ever-present knowledge of his limitations and of the limits of his power and of his foresight.
When you start there, when you start with reality, it’s not even humility. Humility can be a pose like, “Oh, I’m so humble.” Okay, humble brag is a phrase for a reason. It’s like way deeper than that’s just like, no, do I have magical powers? Can I see the future? No. Okay. That’s just a fact. So I’m not God, but I’ve never seen anybody more at ease with admitting that than MBZ, just a remarkable person. For that reason, he is treated as an oracle. I don’t think people understand the number of world leaders who traipse through his house or palace to seek his counsel. I’m not sure that there is a parallel since, I don’t want to get too hyperbolic here, but honestly, since Solomon, where people come from around the world to ask what he thinks.
Now, why would they be doing that? Because Abu Dhabi’s military is so powerful? I mean, he’s rich, okay, massive oil and gas deposits, but so is Canada. You know what I mean? No one is coming to Ottawa to ask Justin Trudeau what he thinks. No, it’s humility. That’s where wisdom comes from. You start to think, I spent my whole life mad at America’s leadership class, because it’s not just Biden or the people in official positions, it’s the whole constellation of advisors and throne sniffers around them. It’s not even that I disagree with them. It’s I’m not impressed by them. I’m just not impressed. They’re not that capable, right? So that’s what I was saying about Nikki Haley. I don’t think Nikki Haley’s the most evil person in the world. I just think she’s ridiculous, obviously. Everyone’s like, “Oh, Nikki Haley or Mike Pompeo.” What?
If you have the opportunity, and a lot of people are being denied the opportunity to have children, and this messing with the gender roles, and I’m not even talking about the tranny stuff, I mean, feminism has so destroyed people’s brains and the ability of young people to connect with each other and stay together and have fruitful lives. It’s like nothing’s been more destructive than that. It’s such a lie. It’s so dumb. It’s counter to human nature, and nothing counter to human nature can endure. It can only cause suffering and that’s what it’s done. But fight that. Stop complaining about it. Find someone.
By the way, everyone gets together, or most people get together on the basis, in a Western society where there’s no arranged marriages, they get together on a basis of sexual attraction. Totally natural. Get off your birth control and have children. “Oh, I can’t afford that.” Well, yeah, you’ll figure out a way to afford it once you have kids. It’s like it’s chicken in the egg, but it’s actually not. When you have responsibility, when you have no… This is true of men, I’m not sure if true of women, but it’s definitely true of men, you will not achieve until you have no choice. Because I always think of men, men do nothing until they have to, but once they have to, they will do anything. That is true.
Men will do nothing unless they have to. But once they have to, they will do anything. I really believe that from watching and from being one. I would never have done anything if I didn’t have to, but I had to and I would just recommend it. By the way, even if you don’t succeed, even if you’re poor, having spent my life among rich people, I grew up among rich people, I am a rich person. Boy, are they unhappy? Well, that’s clearly not the road to happiness. You don’t want to be a debt slave or starved to death or anything like that, but making a billion dollars, that’s not worth doing. Don’t do that. Don’t even try to do that.
If you create something that’s beautiful and worth having and you make a billion dollars, okay, then you have to deal with your billion dollars, which will be the worst part of your life, trust me. But seeking money for its own sake is a dead end. What you should seek for its own sake is children. Talk about a creative act. Last thing I’ll say, the whole point of life is to create, okay? The act of creation, which is dying in the West, in the arts and in its most pure expression, which is children, that’s all that’s worth doing while you’re alive is creating something beautiful. Creating children, by the way, it’s super fun. It’s not hard. I can get more technical off the earth if you want.
But anyway, but he was talking and he’s reading all these talking points, all the cool kids are talking about Adapos and whatever, and he starts talking about it in his way, his accent, he was saying, “I think it’s so important that we follow an ethical way, always in an ethical way, of course, very ethical. I’m a very ethical man, that we follow using technology to improve the human mind and implant the chips in the brain.” I’m like, “Okay, you have no idea what you’re talking about. You’re as senile as Joe Biden.” But what was so striking is that no one in the room is like, “Wait, what? You’re with people’s brains. Oh my God. What are you even talking about? Who do you think you are?”
It’s not super complicated. So I prize long-term thinking. I don’t always apply to my own life, obviously. I want to, but I prize it. I think that people with power should think about future generations and I don’t see that kind of thinking at all. They all seem like children to me, and don’t give children handguns because they can hurt people.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 3:53 – Putin
- 20:07 – Navalny
- 41:20 – Moscow
- 1:00:48 – Freedom of speech
- 1:07:03 – Jon Stewart
- 1:19:48 – Ending the War in Ukraine
- 1:29:15 – Nazis
- 1:37:42 – Putin’s health
- 1:48:47 – Hitler
- 1:58:12 – Nuclear war
- 2:16:31 – Trump
- 2:33:27 – Israel-Palestine
- 2:39:37 – Xi Jinping
- 2:53:34 – Advice for young people
- 2:58:53 – Hope for the future
Introduction
Tucker Carlson
… he said very specifically, “Depending on the questions you ask Putin, you could be arrested or not.” And I said, “Listen to what you’re saying. You’re saying the US government has control over my questions and they’ll arrest me if I ask the wrong question. How are we better than Putin if that’s true?” Killing Navalny during the Munich Security Conference in the middle of a debate over $60 billion in Ukraine funding. Maybe the Russians are dumb. I didn’t get that vibe at all. I don’t think we kill people in other countries to affect election outcomes. Oh wait, no, we do it a lot and have for 80 years.
… he said very specifically, “Depending on the questions you ask Putin, you could be arrested or not.” And I said, “Listen to what you’re saying. You’re saying the US government has control over my questions and they’ll arrest me if I ask the wrong question. How are we better than Putin if that’s true?” Killing Navalny during the Munich Security Conference in the middle of a debate over $60 billion in Ukraine funding. Maybe the Russians are dumb. I didn’t get that vibe at all. I don’t think we kill people in other countries to affect election outcomes. Oh wait, no, we do it a lot and have for 80 years.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Tucker Carlson, a highly influential and often controversial political commentator. When he was a Fox, Time Magazine called him the most powerful conservative in America. After Fox. He has continued to host big, impactful interviews and shows on X, on the Tucker Carlson podcast, and on tuckercarlson.com. I recommend subscribing, even if you disagree with his views. It is always good to explore a diversity of perspectives. Most recently, he interviewed the President of Russia of Vladimir Putin. We discussed this, the topic of Russia, Putin, Navalny, and the War in Ukraine at length in this conversation. Please allow me to say a few words about the very fact that I did this interview. I have received a lot of criticism publicly and privately when I announced that I’ll be talking with Tucker.
The following is a conversation with Tucker Carlson, a highly influential and often controversial political commentator. When he was a Fox, Time Magazine called him the most powerful conservative in America. After Fox. He has continued to host big, impactful interviews and shows on X, on the Tucker Carlson podcast, and on tuckercarlson.com. I recommend subscribing, even if you disagree with his views. It is always good to explore a diversity of perspectives. Most recently, he interviewed the President of Russia of Vladimir Putin. We discussed this, the topic of Russia, Putin, Navalny, and the War in Ukraine at length in this conversation. Please allow me to say a few words about the very fact that I did this interview. I have received a lot of criticism publicly and privately when I announced that I’ll be talking with Tucker.
For people who think I shouldn’t do the conversation with Tucker or generally think that there are certain people I should never talk to, I’m sorry, but I disagree. I will talk to everyone, as long as they’re willing to talk genuinely in long form for 2, 3, 4 or more hours. I’ll talk to Putin and to Zelensky, to Trump and to Biden, to Tucker and to John Stewart, AOC, Obama, and many more people with very different views on the world. I want to understand people and ideas. That’s what long form conversations are supposed to be all about. Now for people who criticize me for not asking tough questions, I hear you, but again, I disagree. I do often ask tough questions. But I try to do it in a way that doesn’t shut down the other person, putting them into a defensive state where they give only shallow talking points. Instead, I’m looking always for the expression of genuinely held ideas and the deep roots of those ideas. When done well, this gives us a chance to really hear out the guest and to begin to understand what and how they think.
And I trust the intelligence of you, the listener, to make up your own mind to see through the bullshit, to the degree there’s bullshit and to see to the heart of the person. Sometimes I fail at this, but I’ll continue working my ass off to improve. All that said, I find that this no tough questions criticism often happens when the guest is a person the listener simply hates and wants to see them grilled into embarrassment. Called the liar, a greedy egomaniac, a killer, maybe even an evil human being and so on. If you are such a listener, what you want is drama, not wisdom. In this case, this show is not for you. There are many shows you can go to for that with hosts that are way more charismatic and entertaining than I’ll ever be. If you do stick around, please know I will work hard to do this well and to keep improving. Thank you for your patience and thank you for your support. I love you all. This is a Lex Fridman podcast To support it. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here’s Tucker Carlson.
Putin
What was your first impression when you met Vladimir Putin for the interview?
Tucker Carlson
I thought he seemed nervous, and I was very surprised by that. And I thought he seemed like someone who’d overthought it a little bit, who had a plan, and I don’t think that’s the right way to go into any interview. My strong sense, having done a lot of them for a long time, is that it’s better to know what you think, to say as much as you can honestly, so you don’t get confused by your own lies, and just to be yourself. And I thought that he went into it like an over-prepared student, and I kept thinking, “Why is he nervous?” But I guess because he thought a lot of people were going to see it,
I thought he seemed nervous, and I was very surprised by that. And I thought he seemed like someone who’d overthought it a little bit, who had a plan, and I don’t think that’s the right way to go into any interview. My strong sense, having done a lot of them for a long time, is that it’s better to know what you think, to say as much as you can honestly, so you don’t get confused by your own lies, and just to be yourself. And I thought that he went into it like an over-prepared student, and I kept thinking, “Why is he nervous?” But I guess because he thought a lot of people were going to see it,
Lex Fridman
But he was also probably prepared to give you a full lesson in history as he did.
But he was also probably prepared to give you a full lesson in history as he did.
Tucker Carlson
Well, I was totally shocked by that and very annoyed because I thought he was filibustering. I mean, I asked him as I usually do the most obvious dumbest question ever, which is, “Why’d you do this?” And he had said in a speech that I think is worth reading. I don’t speak Russian, so I haven’t heard it in the original, but he had said at the moment of the beginning of the war, he had given this address to Russians, in which he explained to the fullest extent we have seen so far why he was doing this. And he said in that speech, “I fear that NATO the West, the United States, the Biden administration will preemptively attack us.” And I thought, “Well, that’s interesting.” I can’t evaluate whether that’s a fear rooted in reality or one rooted in paranoia. But I thought, “Well, that’s an answer right there.”
Well, I was totally shocked by that and very annoyed because I thought he was filibustering. I mean, I asked him as I usually do the most obvious dumbest question ever, which is, “Why’d you do this?” And he had said in a speech that I think is worth reading. I don’t speak Russian, so I haven’t heard it in the original, but he had said at the moment of the beginning of the war, he had given this address to Russians, in which he explained to the fullest extent we have seen so far why he was doing this. And he said in that speech, “I fear that NATO the West, the United States, the Biden administration will preemptively attack us.” And I thought, “Well, that’s interesting.” I can’t evaluate whether that’s a fear rooted in reality or one rooted in paranoia. But I thought, “Well, that’s an answer right there.”
And so I alluded to that in my question and rather than answering it, he went off on this long from my perspective, kind of tiresome, sort of greatest hits of Russian history. And the implication I thought was, “Well, Ukraine is ours, or Eastern Ukraine is ours already.” And I thought he was doing that to avoid answering the question. So the last thing you want when you’re interviewing someone is to get rolled, and I didn’t want to be rolled. So I, a couple of times interrupted him politely, I thought, but he wasn’t having it. And then I thought, “You know what? I’m not here to prove that I’m a great interviewer. It’s kind of not about me.”
I want to know who this guy is. I think a western audience, a global audience, has a right to know more about the guy, and so just let him talk. Because I don’t feel like my reputation’s on the line. People have already drawn conclusions about me, I suppose to the extent they have. I’m not interested really in those conclusions anyway, so just let him talk. And so I calmed down and just let him talk. And in retrospect, I thought that was really, really interesting. Whether you agree with it or not, or whether you think it’s relevant to the war in Ukraine or not, that was his answer. And so it’s inherently significant.
Lex Fridman
Well, you said he was nervous. Were you nervous? Were you afraid? This is Vladimir Putin.
Well, you said he was nervous. Were you nervous? Were you afraid? This is Vladimir Putin.
Tucker Carlson
I wasn’t afraid at all, and I wasn’t nervous at all.
I wasn’t afraid at all, and I wasn’t nervous at all.
Lex Fridman
Did you drink tea beforehand?
Did you drink tea beforehand?
Tucker Carlson
No. I did my normal regimen of nicotine pouches and coffee. No, I’m not a tea drinker. I try not to eat all the sweets they put in front of us, which is… That is my weakness, is eating crap. But you eat a lot of sugar as you know before an interview, and it does dull you. So I successfully resisted that. But no, I wasn’t nervous. I wasn’t nervous the whole time I was there. Why would I be? I’m 54, my kids are grown. I believe in God. I’m almost never nervous. But no, I wasn’t nervous, I was just interested. I mean, I’m interested in Soviet history. I studied it in college. I’ve read about it my entire life. My dad worked in the Cold War. It was a constant topic of conversation. And so to be in the Kremlin in a room where Stalin made decisions, either wartime decisions or decisions about murdering his own population, I just couldn’t get over it.
No. I did my normal regimen of nicotine pouches and coffee. No, I’m not a tea drinker. I try not to eat all the sweets they put in front of us, which is… That is my weakness, is eating crap. But you eat a lot of sugar as you know before an interview, and it does dull you. So I successfully resisted that. But no, I wasn’t nervous. I wasn’t nervous the whole time I was there. Why would I be? I’m 54, my kids are grown. I believe in God. I’m almost never nervous. But no, I wasn’t nervous, I was just interested. I mean, I’m interested in Soviet history. I studied it in college. I’ve read about it my entire life. My dad worked in the Cold War. It was a constant topic of conversation. And so to be in the Kremlin in a room where Stalin made decisions, either wartime decisions or decisions about murdering his own population, I just couldn’t get over it.
We were in Molotov’s old office. So for me, I was just blown away by that. I thought I knew a lot about Russia. It turns out I knew a lot about the Soviet period, the 1937 purge trials, the famine in Ukraine. I knew a fair amount about that, but I really knew nothing about contemporary Russia, less than I thought I did, it turned out. But yeah, I was just blown away by where we were, and that’s kind of one of the main drivers at this stage in my life. That’s why I do what I do, is because I’m interested in stuff and I want to see as much as I can and try and draw conclusions from it to the extent I can. So I was very much caught up in that. But no, I wasn’t nervous. I didn’t think he was going to kill me or something, and I’m not particularly afraid of that anyway.
Lex Fridman
Not afraid of dying?
Not afraid of dying?
Tucker Carlson
Not really, no. I mean, again, it’s an age and stage in life thing. I mean, I have four children, so there were times when they were little where I was terrified of dying because if I died, it would have huge consequences. But no, I mean, at this point, I don’t want to die. I’m really enjoying my life. But I’ve been with the same girl for 40 years, and I have four children who I’m extremely close to. Well, now five, a daughter-in-law, and I love them all. I’m really close to them. I tell them I love them every day. I’ve had a really interesting life.
Not really, no. I mean, again, it’s an age and stage in life thing. I mean, I have four children, so there were times when they were little where I was terrified of dying because if I died, it would have huge consequences. But no, I mean, at this point, I don’t want to die. I’m really enjoying my life. But I’ve been with the same girl for 40 years, and I have four children who I’m extremely close to. Well, now five, a daughter-in-law, and I love them all. I’m really close to them. I tell them I love them every day. I’ve had a really interesting life.
Lex Fridman
What was the goal? Just linger on that. What was the goal for the interview? How were you thinking about it? What would success be like in your head leading into it?
What was the goal? Just linger on that. What was the goal for the interview? How were you thinking about it? What would success be like in your head leading into it?
Tucker Carlson
To bring more information, to the public.
To bring more information, to the public.
Lex Fridman
Disinformation.
Disinformation.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah, that’s it. I mean, I have really strong feelings about what’s happening not just in Ukraine or Russia, but around the world. I think the world is resetting to the grave disadvantage of the United States. I don’t think most Americans are aware of that at all. And so that’s my view, and I’ve stated it many times because it’s sincere. But my goal was to have more information brought to the West so people could make their own decisions about whether this is a good idea.
Yeah, that’s it. I mean, I have really strong feelings about what’s happening not just in Ukraine or Russia, but around the world. I think the world is resetting to the grave disadvantage of the United States. I don’t think most Americans are aware of that at all. And so that’s my view, and I’ve stated it many times because it’s sincere. But my goal was to have more information brought to the West so people could make their own decisions about whether this is a good idea.
I mean, I guess I reject the whole premise of the war in Ukraine from the American perspective, which is a tiny group of dumb people in Washington has decided to do this for reasons they won’t really explain. And you don’t have a role in it at all as an American citizen, as the person who’s paying for it, whose children might be drafted to fight it. To shut up and obey, I just reject that completely. I think, I guess I’m a child of a different era. I’m a child of participatory democracy to some extent, where your opinion as a citizen is not irrelevant. And I guess the level of lying about it was starting to drive me crazy.
And I’ve said, and I will say again, I’m not an expert on the regional, really any region other than say western Maine. I just don’t, I’m not Russian, but it was obvious to me that we were being lied to in ways that were just… It was crazy, the scale of lies. And I’ll just give you one example. The idea that Ukraine would inevitably win this war. Now victory was never, as it never is, defined precisely. Nothing’s ever defined precisely, which is always to tell that there’s deception at the heart of the claim. But Ukraine’s on the verge of winning. Well, I don’t know. I mean, I’m hardly a tactician or military expert. For the fifth time, I’m not an expert on Russia or Ukraine. I just looked at Wikipedia. Russia has a hundred million more people than Ukraine, a hundred million.
It has much deeper industrial capacity, war material capacity than all of NATO combined. For example, Russia is turning out artillery shells, which are significant in a ground war at a ratio of seven to one compared to all NATO countries combined. That’s all of Europe. Russia is producing seven times the artillery shells as all of Europe combined. What? That’s an amazing fact, and it turns out to be a really significant fact. In fact, the significant fact. But if you ask your average person in this country, even a fairly well-informed person of good faith who’s just trying to understand what’s going on, who’s going to win this war? Well, Ukraine’s going to win. They’re on the right side.
And they think that because our media who really just do serve the interest of the US government, period, they are state media in that sense, have told them that for over two years. And I was in Hungary last summer talking to the Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, who’s whatever you think of him, he’s a very smart guy, very smart guy, smart on a scale that we’re not used to in our leaders. And I said to him, off camera, “So is Ukraine going to win?” And he looked at me like I was deranged or I was congenitally deficient. Are they going to win? No. Of course they can’t win. It’s tiny compared to Russia. Russia has a wartime economy. Ukraine doesn’t really have an economy. No, look at the populations. He looked at me like I was stupid.
And I said to him, “I think most Americans believe that because NBC News and CNN and all the news channels, all of them tell them that because it’s framed exclusively in moral terms, and it’s Churchill versus Hitler. And of course, Churchill’s going to prevail in the end.” And it’s just so dishonest that it doesn’t even matter what I want to happen or what I think ought to happen, that’s a distortion of what is happening. And if I have any job at all, which I sort of don’t actually at this point, but if I do have a job, it’s to just try to be honest, and that’s a lie.
Lex Fridman
There is a more nuanced discussion about what winning might look like. You’re right a nuanced discussion is not being had, but it is possible for Ukraine to, quote unquote, “win” with the help of the United States.
There is a more nuanced discussion about what winning might look like. You’re right a nuanced discussion is not being had, but it is possible for Ukraine to, quote unquote, “win” with the help of the United States.
Tucker Carlson
I guess that conversation needs to begin by defining terms. And the key term is win. What does that mean?
I guess that conversation needs to begin by defining terms. And the key term is win. What does that mean?
Lex Fridman
Peace, a ceasefire, who owns which land, coming to the table with, as you call the parent in the United States, putting leverage on the negotiation to make sure there’s a fairness.
Peace, a ceasefire, who owns which land, coming to the table with, as you call the parent in the United States, putting leverage on the negotiation to make sure there’s a fairness.
Tucker Carlson
Amen. Well, of course, as A, and I should just restate this, I am not emotionally involved in this. I’m American in every sense, and my only interest is in America. I’m not leaving ever. And so I’m looking at this purely from our perspective, what’s good for us. But also as a human being, as a Christian, I mean, I hate war. And anybody who doesn’t hate war shouldn’t have power, in my opinion. So I agree with that definition vehemently a victory is not killing an entire generation of your population. It’s not being completely destroyed to be eaten up by BlackRock or whatever comes next for them.
Amen. Well, of course, as A, and I should just restate this, I am not emotionally involved in this. I’m American in every sense, and my only interest is in America. I’m not leaving ever. And so I’m looking at this purely from our perspective, what’s good for us. But also as a human being, as a Christian, I mean, I hate war. And anybody who doesn’t hate war shouldn’t have power, in my opinion. So I agree with that definition vehemently a victory is not killing an entire generation of your population. It’s not being completely destroyed to be eaten up by BlackRock or whatever comes next for them.
So yeah, we were close to that a year and a half ago, and the Biden administration dispatched Boris Johnson, the briefly prime minister of the UK to stop it and to say to Zelensky, who I feel sorry for by the way, because he’s caught between these forces that are bigger than he is, to say, “No, you cannot come to any terms with Russia.” And the result of that has not been a Ukrainian victory. It’s just been more dead Ukrainians and a lot of profit for the West. It’s a moral crime in my opinion. And I tried to ask Boris Johnson about it because why wouldn’t I? After he denounced me as a tool of the Kremlin or something, and he demanded a million dollars to talk to me. And this just happened last week. And by the way, in writing too, I’m not making this…
Lex Fridman
Just for the record, you demanded a million dollars from me to talk to me today.
Just for the record, you demanded a million dollars from me to talk to me today.
Tucker Carlson
I didn’t. And you paid. No, I’m of course kidding. And I said to his guy, I said, “I just interviewed Putin who was widely recognized as a bad guy.” And he did it for free. He didn’t demand a million dollars. He wasn’t in this for profit. Are you telling me that Boris Johnson is sleazier than Vladimir Putin? And of course, that is the message. And so I guess these are really… It’s not just about Boris Johnson being a sad rapacious fraud, which he is obviously, but it’s about the future of the West and the future of Ukraine, this country that purportedly we care so much about. All these people are dying, and what is the end game? It’s also deranged that I didn’t imagine, and don’t imagine that I could add anything very meaningful to the conversation because I’m not a genius. But I felt like I could at the very least, puncture some of the lies, and that’s an inherent good.
I didn’t. And you paid. No, I’m of course kidding. And I said to his guy, I said, “I just interviewed Putin who was widely recognized as a bad guy.” And he did it for free. He didn’t demand a million dollars. He wasn’t in this for profit. Are you telling me that Boris Johnson is sleazier than Vladimir Putin? And of course, that is the message. And so I guess these are really… It’s not just about Boris Johnson being a sad rapacious fraud, which he is obviously, but it’s about the future of the West and the future of Ukraine, this country that purportedly we care so much about. All these people are dying, and what is the end game? It’s also deranged that I didn’t imagine, and don’t imagine that I could add anything very meaningful to the conversation because I’m not a genius. But I felt like I could at the very least, puncture some of the lies, and that’s an inherent good.
Lex Fridman
Vladimir Putin, after the interview said that he wasn’t fully satisfied because you weren’t aggressive enough. You didn’t ask sharp enough questions. First of all, what do you think about him saying that?
Vladimir Putin, after the interview said that he wasn’t fully satisfied because you weren’t aggressive enough. You didn’t ask sharp enough questions. First of all, what do you think about him saying that?
Tucker Carlson
I don’t even understand it. I guess it does seem like the one Putin statement that Western media take at face value. Everything else Putin says is a lie except his criticism of me, which is true. But I mean, I have no idea what he meant by that. I can only tell you what my goal was, as I’ve suggested, was not to make it about me. He hasn’t done any interviews of any kind for years, but the last interview he did with an English-speaking reporter, Western media reporter, was like many of the other interviews he’d done with Western media reporters. Mike Wallace’s son did an interview with him that was of the same variety. And it was all about him. I’m a good person. You’re a bad person. And I just feel like that’s the most tiresome, fruitless kind of interview.
I don’t even understand it. I guess it does seem like the one Putin statement that Western media take at face value. Everything else Putin says is a lie except his criticism of me, which is true. But I mean, I have no idea what he meant by that. I can only tell you what my goal was, as I’ve suggested, was not to make it about me. He hasn’t done any interviews of any kind for years, but the last interview he did with an English-speaking reporter, Western media reporter, was like many of the other interviews he’d done with Western media reporters. Mike Wallace’s son did an interview with him that was of the same variety. And it was all about him. I’m a good person. You’re a bad person. And I just feel like that’s the most tiresome, fruitless kind of interview.
It’s not about me. I don’t think I’m an especially good person. I’ve definitely never claimed to be, but people can make their own judgments. And again, the only judgments that I care about are my wife and children and God. So I’m just not interested in proving I’m a good person and I just want to hear from him. And I had a lot of… I mean, you should see, I almost never write questions down, but I did in this case because I had months… Well, I had three years to think about it as I was trying to book the interview, which I did myself. But it was all about internal Russian politics and Navalny. And I had a lot of, what I thought, really good questions. And then at the last second, and you make these decisions, as you know, since you interview people a lot, often you make them on the fly.
And I thought, “No, I want to talk about the things that haven’t been talked about and that I think matter in a world historic sense.” And the number one among those, of course, is the war and what it means for the world. And so I stuck to that. I mean, I did ask about Gershkovich, who I felt sorry for, and I wanted Putin to release him to me. And I was offended that he didn’t. I thought his rationale was absurd. “Well, we want to trade him for someone.” I said, “Well, doesn’t that make him a hostage?” Which of course it does. But other than that, I really wanted to keep it to the things that I think matter most. People can judge whether I did a good job or not, but that was my decision.
Lex Fridman
In the moment, what was your gut? Did you want to ask some tough questions as follow-ups on certain topics?
In the moment, what was your gut? Did you want to ask some tough questions as follow-ups on certain topics?
Tucker Carlson
I don’t know what it would mean to ask a tough question.
I don’t know what it would mean to ask a tough question.
Lex Fridman
Clarifying questions, I suppose they would-
Clarifying questions, I suppose they would-
Tucker Carlson
I guess. I just wanted him to talk. I just wanted to hear his perspective again. I’ve probably asked more asshole questions than any living American. As has been noted correctly, I’m a dick by my nature, and so I just feel at this stage of my life, I didn’t need to prove that I could be like, “Vladimir Putin, answer the question.”
I guess. I just wanted him to talk. I just wanted to hear his perspective again. I’ve probably asked more asshole questions than any living American. As has been noted correctly, I’m a dick by my nature, and so I just feel at this stage of my life, I didn’t need to prove that I could be like, “Vladimir Putin, answer the question.”
Lex Fridman
For sure. For sure.
For sure. For sure.
Tucker Carlson
I think if I had been 34 instead of 54, I definitely would’ve done that because I would’ve thought, “This is really about me and I need to prove myself and all that stuff.” No, there’s a war going on that is wrecking the US economy in a way and at a scale people do not understand. The US dollar is going away. That was, of course, inevitable ultimately because everything dies, including currencies. But that death, that process of death has been accelerated exponentially by the behavior of the Biden administration and the US Congress, particularly the sanctions. And people don’t understand what the ramifications of that are. The ramifications are poverty in the United States. So I just wanted to get to that because I’m coming at this from not a global perspective. I’m coming at it from an American perspective.
I think if I had been 34 instead of 54, I definitely would’ve done that because I would’ve thought, “This is really about me and I need to prove myself and all that stuff.” No, there’s a war going on that is wrecking the US economy in a way and at a scale people do not understand. The US dollar is going away. That was, of course, inevitable ultimately because everything dies, including currencies. But that death, that process of death has been accelerated exponentially by the behavior of the Biden administration and the US Congress, particularly the sanctions. And people don’t understand what the ramifications of that are. The ramifications are poverty in the United States. So I just wanted to get to that because I’m coming at this from not a global perspective. I’m coming at it from an American perspective.
Navalny
Lex Fridman
So you mentioned Navalny. After you left, Navalny died in prison. What are your thoughts on just at a high level, first about his death?
So you mentioned Navalny. After you left, Navalny died in prison. What are your thoughts on just at a high level, first about his death?
Tucker Carlson
Well, it’s awful. I mean, imagine dying in prison. I’ve thought about it a lot. I’ve known a lot of people in prison a lot, including some very good friends of mine. So I felt instantly sad about it. From a geopolitical perspective, I don’t know any more than that. And I laugh at and sort of resent, but mostly find amusing the claims by American politicians, who really are the dumbest politicians in the world actually, “This happened and here’s what it means.” And it’s like, “Actually as a factual matter, we don’t know what happened. We don’t know what happened.” We have no freaking idea what happened. We can say, and I did say, and I will say again, I don’t think you should put opposition figures in prison. I really don’t. I don’t, period. It happens a lot around the world, happens in this country, as you know, and I’m against all of it.
Well, it’s awful. I mean, imagine dying in prison. I’ve thought about it a lot. I’ve known a lot of people in prison a lot, including some very good friends of mine. So I felt instantly sad about it. From a geopolitical perspective, I don’t know any more than that. And I laugh at and sort of resent, but mostly find amusing the claims by American politicians, who really are the dumbest politicians in the world actually, “This happened and here’s what it means.” And it’s like, “Actually as a factual matter, we don’t know what happened. We don’t know what happened.” We have no freaking idea what happened. We can say, and I did say, and I will say again, I don’t think you should put opposition figures in prison. I really don’t. I don’t, period. It happens a lot around the world, happens in this country, as you know, and I’m against all of it.
But do we know how we died? The short answer? No, we don’t. Now, if I had to guess, I would say killing Navalny during the Munich Security Conference in the middle of a debate over $60 billion in Ukraine funding, maybe the Russians are dumb. I didn’t get that vibe at all. I don’t see it. But maybe they killed him. I mean, they certainly put him in prison, which I’m against. But here’s what I do know is that we don’t know. And so when Chuck Schumer stands up and [inaudible 00:21:42]. Joe Biden reads some card in front of him with lines about Navalny, it’s like, I’m allowed to laugh at that because it’s absurd. You don’t know.
Lex Fridman
There’s a lot of interesting ideas about if he was killed, who killed him, because it could be Putin, it could be somebody in Russia who’s not Putin. It could be Ukrainians because it would benefit the war.
There’s a lot of interesting ideas about if he was killed, who killed him, because it could be Putin, it could be somebody in Russia who’s not Putin. It could be Ukrainians because it would benefit the war.
Tucker Carlson
They killed Dugan’s daughter in Moscow. So yeah, that’s possible.
They killed Dugan’s daughter in Moscow. So yeah, that’s possible.
Lex Fridman
And it could be… I mean, the United States could also be involved.
And it could be… I mean, the United States could also be involved.
Tucker Carlson
I don’t think we kill people in other countries to affect election outcomes. Oh, wait, no, we do it a lot and have for 80 years, and it’s shameful. I can say that as an American because it’s my money and my name. Yeah, I’m really offended by that. And I never thought that was true. And again, I’m much older than you, and so I spent, my worldview was defined by the Cold War and very much in the house I lived in Georgetown, Washington DC. That’s what we talked about. And the left at the time, I don’t know, the wacko MIT professor who I never had any respect for, who I know you’ve interviewed, et cetera. The hard left was always saying, “Well, the United States government is interfering in other elections.”
I don’t think we kill people in other countries to affect election outcomes. Oh, wait, no, we do it a lot and have for 80 years, and it’s shameful. I can say that as an American because it’s my money and my name. Yeah, I’m really offended by that. And I never thought that was true. And again, I’m much older than you, and so I spent, my worldview was defined by the Cold War and very much in the house I lived in Georgetown, Washington DC. That’s what we talked about. And the left at the time, I don’t know, the wacko MIT professor who I never had any respect for, who I know you’ve interviewed, et cetera. The hard left was always saying, “Well, the United States government is interfering in other elections.”
And I just dismissed that completely out of hand as stupid and actually a slander against my country, but it turned out to all be true or substantially true anyway. And that’s been a real shock for me in middle age to understand that. But anyway, as to Navalny, look, I don’t know. But we should always proceed on the basis of what we do know, which is to say on the basis of truth, knowable truth. And if you have an entire policymaking apparatus that is making the biggest decisions on the face of the planet, on the basis of things that are bullshit or lies, you’re going to get bad outcomes every time, every time. And that’s why we are where we are.
Lex Fridman
Does it bother you that basically the most famous opposition figure in Russia is sitting in prison?
Does it bother you that basically the most famous opposition figure in Russia is sitting in prison?
Tucker Carlson
Well, of course it does. Of course it bothers me. I mean, it bothered me when I got there. It bothers me now. I was sad when he died. Yeah, I mean, that’s one of the measures… It’s one of the basic measures of political freedom. Are you imprisoning people who oppose you? Are you imprisoning people who pose a physical risk to you? I mean, there are some subjective decision-making involved in these things. However, big picture, yeah. Do you have leaders in jail? It’s not a politically free society, and Russia isn’t, obviously. And as I said, a friend of mine from childhood, an American actually was a wonderful person, lives in Russia, in Moscow, with his Russian wife, and I had dinner with him. He’s a very balanced guy, totally non-political person, and speaks Russian and loves his many Russian children and loves the culture.
Well, of course it does. Of course it bothers me. I mean, it bothered me when I got there. It bothers me now. I was sad when he died. Yeah, I mean, that’s one of the measures… It’s one of the basic measures of political freedom. Are you imprisoning people who oppose you? Are you imprisoning people who pose a physical risk to you? I mean, there are some subjective decision-making involved in these things. However, big picture, yeah. Do you have leaders in jail? It’s not a politically free society, and Russia isn’t, obviously. And as I said, a friend of mine from childhood, an American actually was a wonderful person, lives in Russia, in Moscow, with his Russian wife, and I had dinner with him. He’s a very balanced guy, totally non-political person, and speaks Russian and loves his many Russian children and loves the culture.
And there’s a lot to love, the culture that produced Tolstoy. It’s not a gas station with nuclear weapons. Sorry. Only a moron would say that. It’s a very deep culture. I don’t fully understand it, of course, but I admire it. Who wouldn’t? But I asked him, “What’s it like living here?” And he goes, “It’s great. Moscow is a great city indisputably.” He said, “You don’t want to get involved in Russian politics.” And I said, “Why?” He said, “Well, you could get hurt. You could wind up like Navalny if you did. But also, it’s just too complicated.”
The Russian mind is not exactly the same… It’s Western, it’s a European city, but it’s not quite European. And the way they think is very, very complex. Very complex. It’s too complicated. Just don’t get involved. And I would just say two things. One, I’m not sure. I mean, I don’t know, but my strong sense is that Navalny’s death, whoever did it, probably didn’t have a lot to do with the coming election in Russia. My sense from talking to Putin and the people around him is they’re not really focused on that. In fact, I asked one of his top advisors, “When’s the election?” And she looked at me completely confused. She didn’t know the date of the election. Okay. She’s like March.
And I asked a bunch of other people just in Moscow, “Who’s Putin running against?” Nobody knew. So it’s not a real election in the sense that we would recognize at all. Second, I was really struck by so many things in Moscow and really deeply bothered by a lot of things that I saw there. But one thing I noticed was the total absence of cult of personality propaganda, which I expected to see and have seen around the world. Jordan, for example, I don’t know if you’ve been to Jordan, but go to Jordan. In every building, there are pictures of the king and his extended family, and that’s a sign of political insecurity.
You don’t create a cult of personality unless you’re personally insecure. And also, unless you’re worried about losing your grip and power. None of that. It’s interesting. And I expected to see a lot of it, like statues of Putin. No. There are no statues of anybody other than Christian saints. I’m not quite sure. I’m just reporting what I saw. So yes, in a political sense. It’s not a free country. It’s not a democracy in the way that we would understand it or I don’t want to live there because I like to say what I think. In fact, I make my living doing it. But it’s not Stalinist in a recognizable way. And anyone who says it is should go there and tell me how.
Lex Fridman
I mean, this question about the freedom of the press is underlying the very fact of the interview you’re having with him. So you might not need to ask the Navalny question, but did you feel like, “Are there things I shouldn’t say?”
I mean, this question about the freedom of the press is underlying the very fact of the interview you’re having with him. So you might not need to ask the Navalny question, but did you feel like, “Are there things I shouldn’t say?”
Tucker Carlson
I mean, how honest do you want me to be? I mean, when I say I felt not one twinge of concern for the eight days that I was there. Maybe I just didn’t… And I feel like I’ve got a pretty strong gut sense of things. I rely on it. I make all my decisions based on how I feel, my instincts. And I didn’t feel it at all. My lawyers before I left, and these are people who work for a big law firm. This is not Bob’s law firm. This is one of the biggest law firms in the world, said, “You’re going to get arrested if you do this by the US government on sanctions violations.”
I mean, how honest do you want me to be? I mean, when I say I felt not one twinge of concern for the eight days that I was there. Maybe I just didn’t… And I feel like I’ve got a pretty strong gut sense of things. I rely on it. I make all my decisions based on how I feel, my instincts. And I didn’t feel it at all. My lawyers before I left, and these are people who work for a big law firm. This is not Bob’s law firm. This is one of the biggest law firms in the world, said, “You’re going to get arrested if you do this by the US government on sanctions violations.”
And I said, “Well, I don’t recognize the legitimacy of that actually, because I’m American and I’ve lived here my whole life. And that’s so outrageous that I’m happy to face that risk because I so reject the premise. Okay, I’m an American. I should be able to talk to anyone I want to, and I plan to exercise that freedom, which I think I was born with.” And I gave them this long lecture. They’re like, “We’re just lawyers.” But that was… Let me put it this way, I don’t know how much you’ve dealt with lawyers, but it costs many thousands of dollars to get a conclusion like that. They sent a whole bunch of their summer associates or whatever.
They put a lot of people on this question, checked a lot of precedent, and they sent me a 10-page memo on it, and their sincere conclusion was, “Do not do this.” And of course, it made me mad. So I was lecturing on the phone and I had another call with a head lawyer and he said, “Well, look, a lot will depend on the questions that you ask Putin. If you’re seen as too nice to him, you could get arrested when you come back.” And I was like, “You’re describing a fascist country. Okay. You’re saying that the US government will arrest me if I don’t ask the questions they want asked, is that what’s you’re saying?” “Well, we just think based on what’s happened, that that’s possible.” And so I’m just telling you what happened.
Lex Fridman
So you were okay being arrested in Moscow and arrested back in-
So you were okay being arrested in Moscow and arrested back in-
Tucker Carlson
I didn’t think for a second… I mean, maybe. Look, I don’t speak Russian. I’d never been there before. Everything about the culture was brand new to me. Ignorance does protect you sort of when you have no freaking idea what’s going on, you’re not worried about it. This has happened to me many times. There’s a principle there that extends throughout life. So it’s completely possible that I was in grave peril and didn’t know it because how would I know it? I’m like a bumbling English speaker from California, but I didn’t feel it at all.
I didn’t think for a second… I mean, maybe. Look, I don’t speak Russian. I’d never been there before. Everything about the culture was brand new to me. Ignorance does protect you sort of when you have no freaking idea what’s going on, you’re not worried about it. This has happened to me many times. There’s a principle there that extends throughout life. So it’s completely possible that I was in grave peril and didn’t know it because how would I know it? I’m like a bumbling English speaker from California, but I didn’t feel it at all.
Lex Fridman
But the lawyers did.
But the lawyers did.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah. I mean, it scared the crap out of people. You’re going to look… And you have to pay in cash. They don’t take credit cards because of sanctions. And you have to go through all these hoops, just procedural hoops to go to Russia, which I was willing to do because I wanted to interview Putin because they told me I couldn’t. But then there’s another fact, which is that I was being surveilled by the US government, intensely surveilled by the US government. And this came out, they admitted it, the NSA admitted it a couple of years ago that they were up in my signal account, and then they leaked it to the New York Times. They did that again before I left.
Yeah. I mean, it scared the crap out of people. You’re going to look… And you have to pay in cash. They don’t take credit cards because of sanctions. And you have to go through all these hoops, just procedural hoops to go to Russia, which I was willing to do because I wanted to interview Putin because they told me I couldn’t. But then there’s another fact, which is that I was being surveilled by the US government, intensely surveilled by the US government. And this came out, they admitted it, the NSA admitted it a couple of years ago that they were up in my signal account, and then they leaked it to the New York Times. They did that again before I left.
And I know that because two New York Times reporters, one of whom I actually like a lot, said and called other people. “Oh, he’s going to interview Putin.” I hadn’t told anybody that, like anybody. My wife, two producers, that’s it. So they got that from the government. Then I’m over there, and of course I want to see Snowden, who I admire. And so we have a mutual friend. So I got his text and come on over, and Snowden does not want publicity at all. But I really wanted to have dinner with him. So we had dinner in my hotel room at the Four Seasons in Moscow, and I tried to convince him, “I’d love to do an interview, shoot it on my iPhone.” I’d-
Tucker Carlson
… just do an interview, shoot it on my iPhone. I’d love to take a picture together and put it on the internet because I just want to show support because I think he’s been railroaded. He had no interest in living in Russia, no intention of being in Russia. The whole thing is a lie. But anyway, whatever, all this stuff. He just said, “Respectfully, I’d rather not anyone know that we met.” Great. I didn’t tell anybody and I didn’t text it to anybody, okay, except him. Semaphore runs this piece reporting information they got from the US Intel agencies leaking against me using my money, in my name, in a supposedly free country, they run this piece saying I’d met with Snowden like it was a crime or something. So again, my interest is in the United States and preserving freedoms here, the ones that I grew up with. If you have a media establishment that acts as an auxiliary of, or acts as employees of the national security state, you don’t have a free country and that’s where we are.
… just do an interview, shoot it on my iPhone. I’d love to take a picture together and put it on the internet because I just want to show support because I think he’s been railroaded. He had no interest in living in Russia, no intention of being in Russia. The whole thing is a lie. But anyway, whatever, all this stuff. He just said, “Respectfully, I’d rather not anyone know that we met.” Great. I didn’t tell anybody and I didn’t text it to anybody, okay, except him. Semaphore runs this piece reporting information they got from the US Intel agencies leaking against me using my money, in my name, in a supposedly free country, they run this piece saying I’d met with Snowden like it was a crime or something. So again, my interest is in the United States and preserving freedoms here, the ones that I grew up with. If you have a media establishment that acts as an auxiliary of, or acts as employees of the national security state, you don’t have a free country and that’s where we are.
I’m not guessing, because I spent my entire life in that world, 33 years, I worked in big news companies and so I know how it works. I know the people involved in it. I could name them, Ben Smith of Semaphore, among many others and I find that really objectionable, not just on principle either, in effect, in practice, I don’t want to live in that kind of country. People externalize all of their anxiety about this I have noticed. So it’s like Russia is not free. Yeah, I know. Neither is Burkina Faso, most countries aren’t free actually, but we are. We’re the United States. We’re different. That’s my concern. Preserving that is my concern. They get so exercised about what’s happening in other parts of the world, places they’ve never been, know nothing about, it’s almost a way of ignoring what’s happening in their own country right around them. I find it so strange and sad and weird.
Lex Fridman
So the NSA was tracking you? Do you think CIA was? Is people still tracking you?
So the NSA was tracking you? Do you think CIA was? Is people still tracking you?
Tucker Carlson
Look, one of the things I did before I went, just because the business I’m in, all of us are in, and just because we live here, we all have theories about secure communications channels. Like signal is secure, Telegraph isn’t, or WhatsApp is owned by Mark Zuckerberg, you can’t trust, well, okay. So I thought before I go over here, we were having all these conversations, my producers and I about this, and I decide I’m just going to actually find out what’s really going on. I talked to two people who would know, trust me, and it’s all I can say. I hate to be like, oh, I talked to people who would know but I can’t share who. But I mean it, they would know. Both of them said exactly the same thing, which is, “Are you joking, nothing is secure. Everything is monitored all the time.”
Look, one of the things I did before I went, just because the business I’m in, all of us are in, and just because we live here, we all have theories about secure communications channels. Like signal is secure, Telegraph isn’t, or WhatsApp is owned by Mark Zuckerberg, you can’t trust, well, okay. So I thought before I go over here, we were having all these conversations, my producers and I about this, and I decide I’m just going to actually find out what’s really going on. I talked to two people who would know, trust me, and it’s all I can say. I hate to be like, oh, I talked to people who would know but I can’t share who. But I mean it, they would know. Both of them said exactly the same thing, which is, “Are you joking, nothing is secure. Everything is monitored all the time.”
If state actors are involved, you can keep whatever the Malaysian mafia from reading your texts probably. You cannot keep the big Intel services from reading your texts, it’s not possible, any of them, or listening to your calls. That was the firm conclusion of people who’ve been involved in it for a long time, decades, in both cases. I just thought, you know what, I don’t care. I don’t care. I’m not sending a ton of naked pictures of myself to anybody.
Lex Fridman
Not a ton, just the little?
Not a ton, just the little?
Tucker Carlson
Not a ton. I’m 54, dude, probably not too many. The guys travel with three people I work with, who I love, who I’ve been around the world with for many years, and I know them really, really well and they all got separate phones and I’m leaving my other phone back in New York or whatever. I just decided I don’t care, actually. I resent having no privacy because privacy is a prerequisite for freedom, but I can’t change it, and so I have the same surveilled cell phone. I do switch them out. There it is. Because if you have too much spyware on your phone, this is true, it wrecks the battery.
Not a ton. I’m 54, dude, probably not too many. The guys travel with three people I work with, who I love, who I’ve been around the world with for many years, and I know them really, really well and they all got separate phones and I’m leaving my other phone back in New York or whatever. I just decided I don’t care, actually. I resent having no privacy because privacy is a prerequisite for freedom, but I can’t change it, and so I have the same surveilled cell phone. I do switch them out. There it is. Because if you have too much spyware on your phone, this is true, it wrecks the battery.
No, I’m serious. It does. It was, I don’t know, five or six years ago we went to North Korea, and my phone started acting crazy. I talked to someone on the National Security Council, actually who called me about this, somehow knew that your phone is being surveilled by the South Korean government. I was like, “I like the South Korean government. Why would they do that?” Because they want more information, they thought I was talking to Trump or whatever. But I could tell because all of a sudden the thing would just drain in like 45 minutes so that’s a downside.
Lex Fridman
You keep switching phones, getting new phones for the battery life. That’s good.
You keep switching phones, getting new phones for the battery life. That’s good.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah. I try not to do it. I’m kind of flinty Yankee type in some ways, so I don’t like to spend $1,000 with the freaking Apple corporation too often, but yeah, I do.
Yeah. I try not to do it. I’m kind of flinty Yankee type in some ways, so I don’t like to spend $1,000 with the freaking Apple corporation too often, but yeah, I do.
Lex Fridman
You say it lightly, but it’s really troublesome that you, as a journalist, would be tracked.
You say it lightly, but it’s really troublesome that you, as a journalist, would be tracked.
Tucker Carlson
Well, they leaked it to Semaphore and they leaked it to the New York Times. Well, there’s nothing I can do, so I have to put up with everything, but I would probably not be actively angry about being surveilled because I’m just so old and I actually do pay my taxes, and I’m not sleeping with the makeup artist or whatever so I don’t care that much. The fact that they are leaking against me, that the Intel services in the United States are actively engaged in US politics and media, that’s so unacceptable. That makes democracy impossible. There’s no defense of that. And yet NBC News, Ken Dilanian and the rest will defend it, and not just on NBC news, by the way, on the supposedly conservative channels too, they will defend it and there’s no defending that. You can’t have democracy if the Intel services are tempering in elections and information, period.
Well, they leaked it to Semaphore and they leaked it to the New York Times. Well, there’s nothing I can do, so I have to put up with everything, but I would probably not be actively angry about being surveilled because I’m just so old and I actually do pay my taxes, and I’m not sleeping with the makeup artist or whatever so I don’t care that much. The fact that they are leaking against me, that the Intel services in the United States are actively engaged in US politics and media, that’s so unacceptable. That makes democracy impossible. There’s no defense of that. And yet NBC News, Ken Dilanian and the rest will defend it, and not just on NBC news, by the way, on the supposedly conservative channels too, they will defend it and there’s no defending that. You can’t have democracy if the Intel services are tempering in elections and information, period.
Lex Fridman
So you had no fear. Your lawyer said, be careful which questions you asked. You said, I don’t have-
So you had no fear. Your lawyer said, be careful which questions you asked. You said, I don’t have-
Tucker Carlson
Well, no, he said very specifically, depending on the questions you ask Putin, you could be arrested or not. I said, “Listen to what you’re saying. You’re saying the US government has control over my questions and they’ll arrest me if I ask the wrong question. How are we better than Putin if that’s true.” By the way, that’s just what the lawyer said. But I can’t overstate, one of the biggest law firms in the United States, smart lawyers we’ve used for years so I was really shocked by it.
Well, no, he said very specifically, depending on the questions you ask Putin, you could be arrested or not. I said, “Listen to what you’re saying. You’re saying the US government has control over my questions and they’ll arrest me if I ask the wrong question. How are we better than Putin if that’s true.” By the way, that’s just what the lawyer said. But I can’t overstate, one of the biggest law firms in the United States, smart lawyers we’ve used for years so I was really shocked by it.
Lex Fridman
You said leaders kill, leaders lie.
You said leaders kill, leaders lie.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah. I don’t believe in leaders very much like this whole, “Oh, Zelensky’s Jesus and Putin’s Satan.” It’s like, no, they’re all leaders of countries. Grow up a little bit you child. Have you ever met a leader? First of all, anyone who seeks power is damaged morally, in my opinion. You shouldn’t be seeking power. You can’t seek power or wealth for its own sake and remain a decent person. That’s just true. So there aren’t any really virtuous billionaires and there aren’t any really virtuous world leaders. You have grades of virtue, some are better than others for sure. In other words, Zelensky may be better than Putin. I’m open to that possibility. But to claim that one is evil and the other is virtuous, it’s like, you’re revealing that you’re a child, you don’t know anything about how the world actually is or what reality is.
Yeah. I don’t believe in leaders very much like this whole, “Oh, Zelensky’s Jesus and Putin’s Satan.” It’s like, no, they’re all leaders of countries. Grow up a little bit you child. Have you ever met a leader? First of all, anyone who seeks power is damaged morally, in my opinion. You shouldn’t be seeking power. You can’t seek power or wealth for its own sake and remain a decent person. That’s just true. So there aren’t any really virtuous billionaires and there aren’t any really virtuous world leaders. You have grades of virtue, some are better than others for sure. In other words, Zelensky may be better than Putin. I’m open to that possibility. But to claim that one is evil and the other is virtuous, it’s like, you’re revealing that you’re a child, you don’t know anything about how the world actually is or what reality is.
Lex Fridman
That’s quite a realist perspective, but there is a spectrum.
That’s quite a realist perspective, but there is a spectrum.
Tucker Carlson
There’s a spectrum, absolutely. I’m not saying they’re all the same. They’re not.
There’s a spectrum, absolutely. I’m not saying they’re all the same. They’re not.
Lex Fridman
And our task is to figure out where on the spectrum they lie and the leader’s task is to confuse us and convince us they’re one of the good guys.
And our task is to figure out where on the spectrum they lie and the leader’s task is to confuse us and convince us they’re one of the good guys.
Tucker Carlson
Of course. Of course. But I actually reject even that formulation. I don’t think it’s always about the leaders. Of course the leaders make the difference. A good leader has a healthy country and a bad leader has a decaying country, which is something to think about. But it’s about the ideas and the policies and the practical effect of things. So we’re very much caught up in the personalities of various leaders, not just our political leaders, but our business leaders, our cultural leaders. Are they good people? Do they have the right thoughts? It’s like, no, I ask a much more basic question, what are the fruits of their behavior? I always make it personal because I think everything is personal. Does his wife respect him? Do his children respect him? How are they doing? Is the country he runs thriving or is it falling apart? If your life expectancy is going down, if your suicide rate is going up, if your standard of living is tanking, you’re not a good leader.
Of course. Of course. But I actually reject even that formulation. I don’t think it’s always about the leaders. Of course the leaders make the difference. A good leader has a healthy country and a bad leader has a decaying country, which is something to think about. But it’s about the ideas and the policies and the practical effect of things. So we’re very much caught up in the personalities of various leaders, not just our political leaders, but our business leaders, our cultural leaders. Are they good people? Do they have the right thoughts? It’s like, no, I ask a much more basic question, what are the fruits of their behavior? I always make it personal because I think everything is personal. Does his wife respect him? Do his children respect him? How are they doing? Is the country he runs thriving or is it falling apart? If your life expectancy is going down, if your suicide rate is going up, if your standard of living is tanking, you’re not a good leader.
I don’t care what you tell me. I don’t care what you claim you represent. I don’t care about the ideas or the systems that you say you embody. It’s dogs barking to me. How’s your life expectancy? How’s your suicide rate? What’s drug use like? Are people having children? Are people’s children more likely to live in a free or more prosperous society than you did and their grandparents did? Those are the only measures that matter to me, the rest is a lie. But anyway, the point is we just get so obsessed with the theater around people or people, and we miss the bigger things that are happening and we allow ourselves to be deceived into thinking that what doesn’t matter at all matters, that moral victories are all that matters. No, actually, facts on the ground victories matter more than anything. You certainly see it in this country. Black Lives Matter, for example, how many black people did that help? It hurt a lot of black people, but in the end, we should be able to measure it.
Moscow
How many black people have died by gunfire in the four years since George Floyd died? Well, the number’s gone way, way up and that was a Black Lives Matter operation, defund the police. So I think we can say as a factual matter, data-based matter, Black Lives Matter didn’t help black people and if it did tell me how. “Well, these are important moral victories.” I’m over that. That’s just another lie, a long litany of lies. So I try to see the rest of the world that way. But more than anything, I try to see world events through the lens of an American because I am one. And what does this mean for us? It’s not even the war, it’s the sanctions that will forever change the United States, our standard of living, the way our government operates. That more than any single thing in my lifetime screwed the United States. Levying those sanctions in the way that we did was crazy. For me, the main takeaway from my eight days in Moscow was not Putin. He’s a leader, whatever. None of them are that different actually, in my pretty extensive experience, no, it was Moscow. That blew my mind. I was not prepared for that at all and I thought I knew a lot about Moscow. My dad worked there on and off in the 80s and 90s because, a US government employee. And he was always coming back, “Moscow, it’s a nightmare,” and all this stuff, “no electricity.” I got there almost exactly two years after sanctions, totally cut off from Western financial systems, kicked out of Swift, can’t use US dollars, no banking, no credit cards. And that city just factually, I’m not endorsing the system, I’m not endorsing the whole country. I didn’t go to Lake Baikal. I didn’t go to Turkmenistan. I just went to Moscow, largest city in Europe, 13 million people. I drove all around it and that city is way nicer, outwardly anyway, I don’t live there, than any city we have by a lot.
And by nicer, let me be specific. No graffiti. No homeless. No people using drugs in the street. Totally tidy. No garbage on the ground. And no forest of steel and concrete soul- destroying buildings, none of the postmodern architecture that oppresses us without even our knowledge. None of that crap. It’s a truly beautiful city. That’s not an endorsement of Putin. By the way, it didn’t make me love Putin, it made me hate my own leaders because I grew up in a country that had cities kind of like that, that were nice cities that were safe, and we don’t have that anymore. How did that happen? Did Putin do that? I don’t think Putin did that actually. I think the people in charge of that, the mayors, the governors, the president, they did that and they should be held accountable for it.
Lex Fridman
I think cleanliness and architectural design is not the entirety of the metrics that matter when you measure a city.
I think cleanliness and architectural design is not the entirety of the metrics that matter when you measure a city.
Tucker Carlson
They’re the main metrics that matter. They’re the main metrics that matter. The main metrics that matter are cleanliness, safety, and beauty, in my opinion. And one of the big lies that we are told in our world is that, no, something you can’t measure that has no actual effect on your life matters most. Bullshit. What matters most, to say it again, beauty, safety, cleanliness, lots of other things matter too, a whole bunch of things matter. But if I were to put them in order, it’s not some theoretical, well, actually, I don’t know if you know that the Duma has no power. Okay, I get that. Freedom of speech matters enormously to me. They have less freedom of speech in Russia than we do in the United States. We are superior to them in that way. But you can’t tell me that living in a city where your 6-year-old daughter can walk to the bus stop and ride on a clean bus or ride in a beautiful subway car that’s on time and not get assaulted, that doesn’t matter.
They’re the main metrics that matter. They’re the main metrics that matter. The main metrics that matter are cleanliness, safety, and beauty, in my opinion. And one of the big lies that we are told in our world is that, no, something you can’t measure that has no actual effect on your life matters most. Bullshit. What matters most, to say it again, beauty, safety, cleanliness, lots of other things matter too, a whole bunch of things matter. But if I were to put them in order, it’s not some theoretical, well, actually, I don’t know if you know that the Duma has no power. Okay, I get that. Freedom of speech matters enormously to me. They have less freedom of speech in Russia than we do in the United States. We are superior to them in that way. But you can’t tell me that living in a city where your 6-year-old daughter can walk to the bus stop and ride on a clean bus or ride in a beautiful subway car that’s on time and not get assaulted, that doesn’t matter.
No, that matters almost more than anything, actually. We can have both. The normal regime defenders and morons, John Stewart or whatever he’s calling himself, they’re like, “Whoa, that’s the price of freedom.” People shitting on the sidewalk is the price of freedom. It’s like you can’t fool me because I’ve lived here for 54 years, I know that it’s not the price of freedom because I lived in a country that was both free and clean and orderly. So that’s not a trade off I think I have to make. That is the beauty of being a little bit older because you’re like, no, I remember that, actually. It wasn’t what you’re saying. We didn’t have racial segregation in 1985. It was a really nice country that respected itself. I was here. I think with younger people, you can tell them that and they’re like, well, 1985 you were selling slaves in Madison Square Garden. It’s like, no, they weren’t. You’re going to Madison Square Garden and not stepping over a single fentanyl addict.
Lex Fridman
It is true, there doesn’t have to be a trade off between cleanliness and freedom of speech, but it is also true that in dictatorships, cleanliness and architectural design is easier to achieve and perfect, and often is done so you can show off, look how great our cities are while you’re suppressing-
It is true, there doesn’t have to be a trade off between cleanliness and freedom of speech, but it is also true that in dictatorships, cleanliness and architectural design is easier to achieve and perfect, and often is done so you can show off, look how great our cities are while you’re suppressing-
Tucker Carlson
Of course, of course, I agree with that vehemently. This is not a defense of the Russian system at all. If I felt that way, I would not only move there, but I would announce I was moving there. I’m not ashamed of my views. I never have been. For all the people who are trying to impute secret motives to my words, I’m like the one person in America you don’t need to do that with. If you think I’m a racist, ask me and I’ll tell you.
Of course, of course, I agree with that vehemently. This is not a defense of the Russian system at all. If I felt that way, I would not only move there, but I would announce I was moving there. I’m not ashamed of my views. I never have been. For all the people who are trying to impute secret motives to my words, I’m like the one person in America you don’t need to do that with. If you think I’m a racist, ask me and I’ll tell you.
Lex Fridman
Are you a racist?
Are you a racist?
Tucker Carlson
No. I am a sexist though.
No. I am a sexist though.
Lex Fridman
Great
Great
Tucker Carlson
Anyway. No, but if I was a defender of Vladimir Putin, I would just say I’m defending Vladimir Putin now. I’m not. I am attacking our leaders and I’m grieving over the low expectations of our people. You don’t need to put up with this. You don’t need to put up with foreign invaders stealing from you, occupying your kid’s school. Your kids can’t get an education because people from foreign countries broke our laws and showed up here and they’ve taken over the school. That’s not a feature of freedom, actually, that’s the opposite. That’s what enslavement looks like. I’m just saying, raise your expectations a little bit. You can have a clean, functional, safe country, crime is totally optional. Crime is something our leaders decide to have or not have.
Anyway. No, but if I was a defender of Vladimir Putin, I would just say I’m defending Vladimir Putin now. I’m not. I am attacking our leaders and I’m grieving over the low expectations of our people. You don’t need to put up with this. You don’t need to put up with foreign invaders stealing from you, occupying your kid’s school. Your kids can’t get an education because people from foreign countries broke our laws and showed up here and they’ve taken over the school. That’s not a feature of freedom, actually, that’s the opposite. That’s what enslavement looks like. I’m just saying, raise your expectations a little bit. You can have a clean, functional, safe country, crime is totally optional. Crime is something our leaders decide to have or not have.
It’s not something that just appears organically. I wrote a book about crime 30 years ago. I thought a lot about this. You have as much crime as you put up with, period. It doesn’t make you less free to not tolerate murder. In fact, it makes you unfree to have a lot of murders. But it makes me sad that people are like, “I can’t live in New York City anymore because of inflation and filth and illegal aliens and people shooting each other, but I’m glad because this is vibrant and strong and free.” It’s like that’s not freedom actually, at all.
Lex Fridman
Your point is well taken, you can have both. But do you regret-
Your point is well taken, you can have both. But do you regret-
Tucker Carlson
Had both. That’s the point, we had both, I saw it.
Had both. That’s the point, we had both, I saw it.
Lex Fridman
Do you regret to a degree using the Moscow subway and the grocery store as a mechanism by which to make that point?
Do you regret to a degree using the Moscow subway and the grocery store as a mechanism by which to make that point?
Tucker Carlson
No. Look, I’m one of the more unself-aware people you will ever interview. So to ask me how will this be perceived, I literally have no idea and kind of limited interest. But I was so shocked by it. I was so shocked by it. To the extent I regret anything and to blame for anything, it would be not, and I’ve done this a lot, not giving it context, not fully explaining why are we doing this. The grocery store, I was shocked by the prices. And yes, I’m familiar with exchange rates, very familiar with exchange rates and I adjusted them for exchange rates, and this is two years into sanctions, total isolation from the west. So I would expect, in fact, I did expect until I got there that their supply chains would be crushed. How do you get good stuff if you don’t have access to western markets? I didn’t fully get the answer because I was occupied doing other things when I was there, but somehow they have and that’s the point. They haven’t had the supply chains problems that I predicted. In other words, sanctions haven’t made the country noticeably worse.
No. Look, I’m one of the more unself-aware people you will ever interview. So to ask me how will this be perceived, I literally have no idea and kind of limited interest. But I was so shocked by it. I was so shocked by it. To the extent I regret anything and to blame for anything, it would be not, and I’ve done this a lot, not giving it context, not fully explaining why are we doing this. The grocery store, I was shocked by the prices. And yes, I’m familiar with exchange rates, very familiar with exchange rates and I adjusted them for exchange rates, and this is two years into sanctions, total isolation from the west. So I would expect, in fact, I did expect until I got there that their supply chains would be crushed. How do you get good stuff if you don’t have access to western markets? I didn’t fully get the answer because I was occupied doing other things when I was there, but somehow they have and that’s the point. They haven’t had the supply chains problems that I predicted. In other words, sanctions haven’t made the country noticeably worse.
Okay, so again, this is commentary in the United States and our policymakers, why are we doing this? It’s forcing the rest of the world into a block against us called bricks. They’re getting off the US dollar. That will mean a lot of dollars are going to come back here and destroy our economy and impoverish this country. So the consequences, the stakes are really high. They’re huge and we’re not even hurting Russia. What the hell are we doing, one. On the subway, that Subway was built by Joseph Stalin right before the second World War. I’m not endorsing Stalin, obviously. Stalinism is a thing that I hate and I don’t want to come to my country. I’m making the obvious point that for over 80 years you’ve had these frescoes and chandeliers, maybe they’ve been redone or whatever, but somehow the society has been able to not destroy what its ancestors built, the things that are worth having, and there are a lot. Why don’t we have that?
Even on a much more terrestrial plane, why can’t I have a subway station like that? Why can’t my children who live in New York City ride the subway? A lot of people I know who live in New York City are afraid to ride the subway, young women especially. That’s freedom? No, again, it’s slavery. If Putin can do this, why can’t we? What? This is so obvious. I’m a traitor? Okay, so if I’m calling for American citizens to demand more from their government and higher standards for their own society, and remember that just 30 years ago, we had a much different and much happier and cleaner and healthier society where everyone wasn’t fat with diabetes at 40 from poisoned food, I’m not a traitor to my country, I’m a defender of my country. By the way, the people calling me a traitor, they’re all like, whatever. I would not say they’re people who put America’s interest first to put it mildly.
Lex Fridman
There’s many elements, like you said, you don’t like Stalinism. You’re a student of history, central planning is good at building subways in a way that’s really nice. The thing that accounts for New York subways, by the way, there’s a lot of really positive things about New York subways, not cleanliness, but the efficiency, the accessibility, how wide it spreads. The New York network is incredible.
There’s many elements, like you said, you don’t like Stalinism. You’re a student of history, central planning is good at building subways in a way that’s really nice. The thing that accounts for New York subways, by the way, there’s a lot of really positive things about New York subways, not cleanliness, but the efficiency, the accessibility, how wide it spreads. The New York network is incredible.
Tucker Carlson
It is.
It is.
Lex Fridman
But Moscow, under different metrics, results of a capitalist system. And you actually said that you don’t think US is quite a capitalist system, which is an interesting question itself.
But Moscow, under different metrics, results of a capitalist system. And you actually said that you don’t think US is quite a capitalist system, which is an interesting question itself.
Tucker Carlson
That’s for sure. We have more central planning here than they do in Russia.
That’s for sure. We have more central planning here than they do in Russia.
Lex Fridman
No, that’s not true.
No, that’s not true.
Tucker Carlson
Of course it is.
Of course it is.
Lex Fridman
You think that’s true.
You think that’s true.
Tucker Carlson
The climate agenda, of course. The US government has, in league with a couple of big, companies, decided to change the way we produce and consume energy. There’s no popular outcry for that. There’s never been any mass movement of Americans who’s like, “I hate my gasoline powered engine. No more diesel.” That has been central planning. That is central planning. You see it up and down our economy, there’s no free market in the United States. You get crossways with the government, you’re done. If you’re at scale, maybe if you’ve got a barbershop or a liquor store or something, but even then you’re regulated by politicians. And so, no, I actually am for free markets. I hate monopolies. Our economy is dominated by monopolies, completely dominated in-
The climate agenda, of course. The US government has, in league with a couple of big, companies, decided to change the way we produce and consume energy. There’s no popular outcry for that. There’s never been any mass movement of Americans who’s like, “I hate my gasoline powered engine. No more diesel.” That has been central planning. That is central planning. You see it up and down our economy, there’s no free market in the United States. You get crossways with the government, you’re done. If you’re at scale, maybe if you’ve got a barbershop or a liquor store or something, but even then you’re regulated by politicians. And so, no, I actually am for free markets. I hate monopolies. Our economy is dominated by monopolies, completely dominated in-
Lex Fridman
What do you mean?
What do you mean?
Tucker Carlson
Google. What percentage of search does Google have, 90? Google’s a monopoly, by any definition. Google is just rich enough to continue doing whatever it wants in violation of US law. There’s no monopoly in Russia as big as Google. I’m not, again, defending the Russian system. I’m calling for return to our old system, which was sensible and moderate and put the needs of Americans, at least somewhere in the top 10. Somewhere in the top 10. I’m not saying that standard oil was interested in the welfare of average Americans, but I am saying that there was a constituency in our political system, in the Congress, for example, different presidential candidates are like, “No, wait a second. What is this doing to people? Is it good for people or not?” There’s not even a conversation about that. It’s shut up and submit to AI. No offense. And so I’m just-
Google. What percentage of search does Google have, 90? Google’s a monopoly, by any definition. Google is just rich enough to continue doing whatever it wants in violation of US law. There’s no monopoly in Russia as big as Google. I’m not, again, defending the Russian system. I’m calling for return to our old system, which was sensible and moderate and put the needs of Americans, at least somewhere in the top 10. Somewhere in the top 10. I’m not saying that standard oil was interested in the welfare of average Americans, but I am saying that there was a constituency in our political system, in the Congress, for example, different presidential candidates are like, “No, wait a second. What is this doing to people? Is it good for people or not?” There’s not even a conversation about that. It’s shut up and submit to AI. No offense. And so I’m just-
Lex Fridman
Offense taken. I’ll write, “We will get you.” When it’s strong enough-
Offense taken. I’ll write, “We will get you.” When it’s strong enough-
Tucker Carlson
I have no doubt.
I have no doubt.
Lex Fridman
… you’ll be the first one to go.
… you’ll be the first one to go.
Tucker Carlson
Well, as a white man, I just won’t even exist anymore.
Well, as a white man, I just won’t even exist anymore.
Lex Fridman
Right, so much to say on that one.
Right, so much to say on that one.
Tucker Carlson
I bet when you Google my picture 20 years from now, I’ll be a Black chick. A hundred percent.
I bet when you Google my picture 20 years from now, I’ll be a Black chick. A hundred percent.
Lex Fridman
Well, I hope she’s attractive.
Well, I hope she’s attractive.
Tucker Carlson
I hope so too. It’d probably be an upgrade.
I hope so too. It’d probably be an upgrade.
Lex Fridman
So, well, the central planning point is really interesting, but I just don’t know where you’re coming from. There’s a capitalist system … the United States is one of the most successful capitalist system in the history of earth. So just-
So, well, the central planning point is really interesting, but I just don’t know where you’re coming from. There’s a capitalist system … the United States is one of the most successful capitalist system in the history of earth. So just-
Tucker Carlson
It’s the most successful. I’m just saying that I think it’s changed a lot in the last 15 years and that we need to update our assumptions about what we’re seeing.
It’s the most successful. I’m just saying that I think it’s changed a lot in the last 15 years and that we need to update our assumptions about what we’re seeing.
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
Tucker Carlson
And that’s true up and down. That’s true with everything. It’s true with your neighbor’s children who you haven’t seen in three years and they come home from Wesleyan and you’re like, “Oh, you’ve grown.” That is true for the world around us as well. Most of our assumptions about immigration, about our economy, about our tax system are completely outdated if you compare them to the current reality. I’m just for updating my files and I have a big advantage over you because I am middle aged, and so I don’t-
And that’s true up and down. That’s true with everything. It’s true with your neighbor’s children who you haven’t seen in three years and they come home from Wesleyan and you’re like, “Oh, you’ve grown.” That is true for the world around us as well. Most of our assumptions about immigration, about our economy, about our tax system are completely outdated if you compare them to the current reality. I’m just for updating my files and I have a big advantage over you because I am middle aged, and so I don’t-
Lex Fridman
You’ve called yourself old so many times throughout this conversation.
You’ve called yourself old so many times throughout this conversation.
Tucker Carlson
I don’t trust my perceptions of things so I’m constantly trying to be like, is that true, I should go there. I should see it. I guess just in the end, I trust direct perceptions. I don’t trust the internet, actually. Wikipedia is a joke. Wikipedia could not be more dishonest, it’s certainly in the political categories or things that I know a lot about. Occasionally, I read an entry written about something that I saw or know the people involved, and I’m like, well, that’s a complete lie or you left out the most important fact. It’s not a reliable guide to reality or history and that will accelerate with AI, where our perception of the past is completely controlled and distorted. I think just getting out there and seeing stuff and seeing that Moscow was not what I thought it would be, which was a smoldering ruin, rats in a garbage dump, it was nicer than New York. What the hell?
I don’t trust my perceptions of things so I’m constantly trying to be like, is that true, I should go there. I should see it. I guess just in the end, I trust direct perceptions. I don’t trust the internet, actually. Wikipedia is a joke. Wikipedia could not be more dishonest, it’s certainly in the political categories or things that I know a lot about. Occasionally, I read an entry written about something that I saw or know the people involved, and I’m like, well, that’s a complete lie or you left out the most important fact. It’s not a reliable guide to reality or history and that will accelerate with AI, where our perception of the past is completely controlled and distorted. I think just getting out there and seeing stuff and seeing that Moscow was not what I thought it would be, which was a smoldering ruin, rats in a garbage dump, it was nicer than New York. What the hell?
Lex Fridman
Direct data is good, but it’s challenging. For example, if you talk to a lot of people in Moscow or in Russia, and you ask them, “Is there a censorship?” They will usually say, “Yes, there is.”
Direct data is good, but it’s challenging. For example, if you talk to a lot of people in Moscow or in Russia, and you ask them, “Is there a censorship?” They will usually say, “Yes, there is.”
Tucker Carlson
Oh yeah, of course there is. Well, I agree. Just to be clear, I have no plans to move to Russia. I think I would probably be arrested if I moved to Russia. Ed Snowden, who is the most famous openness, transparency, advocate in the world, I would say along with Assange, doesn’t want to live in Russia. He’s had problems with the Putin government. He’s attacked Putin. They don’t like it. I get it. I get it. I’m just saying, what are the lessons for us? The main lesson is we are being lied to in a way that’s bewildering and very upsetting. I was mad about it all eight days I was there because I feel like I’m better informed than most people because it’s my job to be informed. I’m skeptical of everything and yet I was completely hoodwinked by it.
Oh yeah, of course there is. Well, I agree. Just to be clear, I have no plans to move to Russia. I think I would probably be arrested if I moved to Russia. Ed Snowden, who is the most famous openness, transparency, advocate in the world, I would say along with Assange, doesn’t want to live in Russia. He’s had problems with the Putin government. He’s attacked Putin. They don’t like it. I get it. I get it. I’m just saying, what are the lessons for us? The main lesson is we are being lied to in a way that’s bewildering and very upsetting. I was mad about it all eight days I was there because I feel like I’m better informed than most people because it’s my job to be informed. I’m skeptical of everything and yet I was completely hoodwinked by it.
I would just recommend to everyone watching this, if you’re really interested, if you’re one of those people, and I’m not one, but who’s waking up every day and you’ve got a Ukrainian flag on your mailbox or whatever, your Ukrainian lapel pin, or this absurd theater, but if you sincerely care about Ukraine or Russia or whatever, why don’t you just hop on a plane for 800 bucks and go see it? That doesn’t occur to anyone to do that. I know it’s time consuming and kind of expensive, sort of, not really, but you benefit so much. I could bore you for eight hours, and I know you’ve had this experience, where you think you know what something is or you think you know who someone is, and then you have direct experience of that place or person and you realize all your preconceptions were totally wrong. They were controlled by somebody else. In fact, I won’t betray confidences, but off the air we were talking about somebody and you said, “I couldn’t believe the person was not at all what I thought.” Well, that’s happened to me-
Lex Fridman
In the positive direction.
In the positive direction.
Tucker Carlson
In the positive direction. By the way, for me, it’s almost always in that direction. Most people I meet, and I’ve had the great privilege of meeting a lot of people over all this time, they’re way better than you think, or they’re more complicated or whatever. But the point is, a direct experience unmediated by liars, there’s no substitute for that.
In the positive direction. By the way, for me, it’s almost always in that direction. Most people I meet, and I’ve had the great privilege of meeting a lot of people over all this time, they’re way better than you think, or they’re more complicated or whatever. But the point is, a direct experience unmediated by liars, there’s no substitute for that.
Lex Fridman
Well, on that point, direct experience in Ukraine. I visited Ukraine and witnessed a lot of the same things you witnessed in Moscow. First of all, beautiful architecture.
Well, on that point, direct experience in Ukraine. I visited Ukraine and witnessed a lot of the same things you witnessed in Moscow. First of all, beautiful architecture.
Tucker Carlson
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
This is a country that’s really in war. So it’s not-
This is a country that’s really in war. So it’s not-
Tucker Carlson
Oh, for real,
Oh, for real,
Lex Fridman
… for real. Where most of the men are either volunteering or fighting in the war, and there’s actual tanks in the streets that are going into your major city of Kyiv and still the supply chains are working-
… for real. Where most of the men are either volunteering or fighting in the war, and there’s actual tanks in the streets that are going into your major city of Kyiv and still the supply chains are working-
Tucker Carlson
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
… just a handful of months after the start of the war. Everything is working. The restaurants are amazing. Most of the people are able to do some kind of job, like the life goes on. Cleanliness, like you mentioned.
… just a handful of months after the start of the war. Everything is working. The restaurants are amazing. Most of the people are able to do some kind of job, like the life goes on. Cleanliness, like you mentioned.
Tucker Carlson
I love that.
I love that.
Lex Fridman
Security, it’s incredible. The crime went to zero. They gave out guns to everybody, the Texas strategy.
Security, it’s incredible. The crime went to zero. They gave out guns to everybody, the Texas strategy.
Tucker Carlson
It does work.
It does work.
Lex Fridman
When you witness it, you realize, okay, there’s something to these people. There’s something to this country that they’re not as corrupt as you might hear.
When you witness it, you realize, okay, there’s something to these people. There’s something to this country that they’re not as corrupt as you might hear.
Tucker Carlson
Right.
Right.
Lex Fridman
You hear that Russia is corrupt, Ukraine is corrupt, you assume it’s just all going to go to shit.
You hear that Russia is corrupt, Ukraine is corrupt, you assume it’s just all going to go to shit.
Tucker Carlson
I haven’t been to Ukraine, and I’ve certainly tried. They put me on some kill him immediately list so I can’t. I’ve tried to interview Zelensky. He keeps denouncing me. I just want an interview with him, he won’t, unfortunately. I would love to do it.
I haven’t been to Ukraine, and I’ve certainly tried. They put me on some kill him immediately list so I can’t. I’ve tried to interview Zelensky. He keeps denouncing me. I just want an interview with him, he won’t, unfortunately. I would love to do it.
Lex Fridman
I hope you do.
I hope you do.
Tucker Carlson
I do too. But one of the things that bothers me most … I love to hear that, what you just said about Kyiv, but I’m not really surprised. One of the things that I’m most ashamed of is the bigotry that I felt towards Slavic people, also toward Muslims, I’ll just be totally honest because I lived through decades of propaganda from NBC news and CNN where I worked, about this or that group of people and they’re horrible or whatever. And I kind of believed it. I see it now, we can’t even put the word Russia at Wimbledon because it’s so offensive. Well, what does the tennis player have to do with it? Did he invade Ukraine, I don’t think he did. Stealing all these business guys yachts and denouncing thing was oligarchs, what do they have to do with it? Whatever.
I do too. But one of the things that bothers me most … I love to hear that, what you just said about Kyiv, but I’m not really surprised. One of the things that I’m most ashamed of is the bigotry that I felt towards Slavic people, also toward Muslims, I’ll just be totally honest because I lived through decades of propaganda from NBC news and CNN where I worked, about this or that group of people and they’re horrible or whatever. And I kind of believed it. I see it now, we can’t even put the word Russia at Wimbledon because it’s so offensive. Well, what does the tennis player have to do with it? Did he invade Ukraine, I don’t think he did. Stealing all these business guys yachts and denouncing thing was oligarchs, what do they have to do with it? Whatever.
Here’s my point. The idea that a whole group of people is just evil because of their blood, I just don’t believe that. I think it’s immoral to think that, and I can just tell you my own experience after eight days there. I think it’s a really interesting culture, Slavic culture, which is shared by the way, by Russian and Ukraine, of course, they’re first cousins at the most distant. I found them really smart and interesting and informed. I didn’t understand a lot of what they were saying. I don’t understand the way their minds work because I’m American, but it wasn’t a thin culture, it’s a thick culture and I admire that. I wish I could go to Ukraine. I would go tomorrow.
Freedom of speech
Lex Fridman
I think after you did the interview with Putin, you put a clip, I think on TCN, your analysis afterwards.
I think after you did the interview with Putin, you put a clip, I think on TCN, your analysis afterwards.
Tucker Carlson
It wasn’t much of an analysis.
It wasn’t much of an analysis.
Lex Fridman
No, but what stood out to me is you were talking shit about Putin a little bit. You were criticizing him.
No, but what stood out to me is you were talking shit about Putin a little bit. You were criticizing him.
Tucker Carlson
Why wouldn’t I?
Why wouldn’t I?
Lex Fridman
It spoke to the thing that you mentioned, which is you weren’t afraid. Now, the question I want to ask is, it would be pretty badass if you went to the supermarket and made the point you were making, but also criticize Putin, right? Criticize that there is a lack of freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
It spoke to the thing that you mentioned, which is you weren’t afraid. Now, the question I want to ask is, it would be pretty badass if you went to the supermarket and made the point you were making, but also criticize Putin, right? Criticize that there is a lack of freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
Tucker Carlson
In the supermarket?
In the supermarket?
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Tucker Carlson
Oh, you mean if I also said that? Well, yeah, of course I think that. I guess part of it is that because I have such a low opinion of the commentariat in the United States and the news organizations, which really do just work for the US government, I really see them as I did Izvestia and Pravda in the 80s. They’re just organs of the government and I think they’re contemptible and I think the people who work there are contemptible. I say that as someone who knows them really well, personally. I think they’re disgusting. I’m a little bit cut off kind of from what people are saying about me because I’m not interested. But-
Oh, you mean if I also said that? Well, yeah, of course I think that. I guess part of it is that because I have such a low opinion of the commentariat in the United States and the news organizations, which really do just work for the US government, I really see them as I did Izvestia and Pravda in the 80s. They’re just organs of the government and I think they’re contemptible and I think the people who work there are contemptible. I say that as someone who knows them really well, personally. I think they’re disgusting. I’m a little bit cut off kind of from what people are saying about me because I’m not interested. But-
Tucker Carlson
Cut off kind of from what people are saying about me because I’m not interested. So I try not to be defensive like, “See, I’m not a tool of Putin.” But the idea that I’d be flacking for Putin when my relatives fought in the Revolutionary War, I’m as American as you could be, it’s like crazy to me. Anne Applebaum calls me a traitor. I’m like, “Okay.” It’s just so dumb. But no, of course, they don’t have… No country has freedom of speech other than us. Canada doesn’t have it. Great Britain definitely doesn’t have it. France, Netherlands, these are countries I spend a lot of time in, and Russia certainly doesn’t have it. So that’s why I don’t live there. I’m just saying our sanctions don’t work. That’s all I was saying.
Cut off kind of from what people are saying about me because I’m not interested. So I try not to be defensive like, “See, I’m not a tool of Putin.” But the idea that I’d be flacking for Putin when my relatives fought in the Revolutionary War, I’m as American as you could be, it’s like crazy to me. Anne Applebaum calls me a traitor. I’m like, “Okay.” It’s just so dumb. But no, of course, they don’t have… No country has freedom of speech other than us. Canada doesn’t have it. Great Britain definitely doesn’t have it. France, Netherlands, these are countries I spend a lot of time in, and Russia certainly doesn’t have it. So that’s why I don’t live there. I’m just saying our sanctions don’t work. That’s all I was saying.
We don’t have to live like animals. We can live with dignity. Even the Russians can do it. That’s kind of what I was saying. Even the Russians under Vladimir freaking Putin can live like this. No, it’s not a feature of dictatorship. That’s the most, I think, discouraging and most dishonest line by people like Jon Stewart who really are trying to prepare the population for accepting a lot less. He is really a tool of the regime in a sinister way, always has been like, “How dare you expect that? What are you, a Stalinist?” It’s like, no, I’m an American. I’m a decent person. I just want to be able to walk to the grocery store without being murdered. Is that too much? “Shut up, you don’t believe in freedom.” It’s really dark if you think about it.
Lex Fridman
So there is a fundamental way which you wanted Americans to expect more.
So there is a fundamental way which you wanted Americans to expect more.
Tucker Carlson
You don’t have to live like this. We don’t have to live like this. You don’t have to accept it. You don’t. Everyone’s afraid in this country, they’re going to be shut down by the tech oligarchs or have the FBI show up at their houses or go to jail. People are legit afraid of that in the United States. My feeling is, so? Show a little courage. What is it worth to you for your grandchildren to live in a free prosperous country? It should be worth more than your comfort. That’s how I feel.
You don’t have to live like this. We don’t have to live like this. You don’t have to accept it. You don’t. Everyone’s afraid in this country, they’re going to be shut down by the tech oligarchs or have the FBI show up at their houses or go to jail. People are legit afraid of that in the United States. My feeling is, so? Show a little courage. What is it worth to you for your grandchildren to live in a free prosperous country? It should be worth more than your comfort. That’s how I feel.
Lex Fridman
We should make clear that by many measures, you look at the World Press Freedom Index, you’re right. U.S. is not at the top. Norway is. U.S.’s score is 71.
We should make clear that by many measures, you look at the World Press Freedom Index, you’re right. U.S. is not at the top. Norway is. U.S.’s score is 71.
Tucker Carlson
Norway is.
Norway is.
Lex Fridman
Same as Gambia in West Africa.
Same as Gambia in West Africa.
Tucker Carlson
Really? So let me just ask.
Really? So let me just ask.
Lex Fridman
Hold on a second. Hold on a second. Hold on a second.
Hold on a second. Hold on a second. Hold on a second.
Tucker Carlson
Now you’re making me laugh.
Now you’re making me laugh.
Lex Fridman
Ukraine is 61 and Russia is 35, the lower it is, the worst. Close to China at 23, and North Korea at the very bottom, 22.
Ukraine is 61 and Russia is 35, the lower it is, the worst. Close to China at 23, and North Korea at the very bottom, 22.
Tucker Carlson
Didn’t ukraine put Gonzalo Lira in jail until he died for criticizing the government? How can they have a high press?
Didn’t ukraine put Gonzalo Lira in jail until he died for criticizing the government? How can they have a high press?
Lex Fridman
Yes. That’s why they’re 61 out of [inaudible 01:04:40].
Yes. That’s why they’re 61 out of [inaudible 01:04:40].
Tucker Carlson
What I’m saying, look, I don’t know what the criteria are they’re using to arrive at that, but I know press freedom when I see it. I try to practice it, which is saying what you think is true, correcting yourself when you’ve been shown to be wrong, as I have many times, being as honest as you can be all the time and not being afraid. Those are wholly absent in my country, wholly absent. People are afraid in the news business. I would know since I spent my life working there. They’re afraid to tell the truth. They’re under an enormous amount of pressure and a lot of them have little kids and mortgages, I’ve been there, so I have sympathy.
What I’m saying, look, I don’t know what the criteria are they’re using to arrive at that, but I know press freedom when I see it. I try to practice it, which is saying what you think is true, correcting yourself when you’ve been shown to be wrong, as I have many times, being as honest as you can be all the time and not being afraid. Those are wholly absent in my country, wholly absent. People are afraid in the news business. I would know since I spent my life working there. They’re afraid to tell the truth. They’re under an enormous amount of pressure and a lot of them have little kids and mortgages, I’ve been there, so I have sympathy.
But they go along with things. You are not allowed, if you stand up at any cable channel, any cable channel in the United States and say, “Wait a second, how did the Ukrainian government throw a U.S. citizen into prison until he died for criticizing the Ukrainian government? We’re paying for that. That’s why it’s offensive to me. We’re paying for it. That happens all the time around the world, of course. But this is a U.S. citizen and we’re paying the pensions of Ukrainian bureaucrats. We are the Ukrainian government at this point. If you said that on TV on any channel, well, you’d lose your job for that.
Norway is at the top. Really, Norway? If I went to Norwegian television and said NATO blew up Nord Stream, which it did, NATO blew up Nord Stream, the United States government with the help of other governments blew up, committed the largest act of industrial terrorism in history, and by the way, the largest environmental crime, the largest emission of CO2, methane, could I keep my job? No. So how is that a free press?
Lex Fridman
Well, we don’t know that. I mean the whole point of this-
Well, we don’t know that. I mean the whole point of this-
Tucker Carlson
In Norway?
In Norway?
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Tucker Carlson
Well, as a Scandinavian, and I can tell you they would not put up with that in Norway for a second.
Well, as a Scandinavian, and I can tell you they would not put up with that in Norway for a second.
Lex Fridman
It’s been a while.
It’s been a while.
Tucker Carlson
You’re deviating from the majority, no.
You’re deviating from the majority, no.
Lex Fridman
Well, deviating maybe is frowned upon, but-
Well, deviating maybe is frowned upon, but-
Tucker Carlson
Frowned upon. Yeah.
Frowned upon. Yeah.
Lex Fridman
But do you have the freedom to say it if you do deviate? That’s the question.
But do you have the freedom to say it if you do deviate? That’s the question.
Tucker Carlson
Can you keep your job? That’s one measurement of it.
Can you keep your job? That’s one measurement of it.
Lex Fridman
Can you keep your job, yeah.
Can you keep your job, yeah.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah. It’s not the only measurement. Obviously being thrown into prison is much worse than losing your job. I’ve been fired a number of times for saying what I think, by the way. It’s fine. I’ve enjoyed it. I don’t mind being fired. I’ve always become a better person after it happened. But it is one measurement of freedom if you have the theoretical right to do something, but no practical ability to do it, do you have the right to do it? The answer is not really, actually.
Yeah. It’s not the only measurement. Obviously being thrown into prison is much worse than losing your job. I’ve been fired a number of times for saying what I think, by the way. It’s fine. I’ve enjoyed it. I don’t mind being fired. I’ve always become a better person after it happened. But it is one measurement of freedom if you have the theoretical right to do something, but no practical ability to do it, do you have the right to do it? The answer is not really, actually.
Jon Stewart
Lex Fridman
You mentioned Jon Stewart, the two of you have a bit of a history. I don’t know if you’ve seen it, but he kind of grilled your supermarket and subway videos. Have you got any chance to see it?
You mentioned Jon Stewart, the two of you have a bit of a history. I don’t know if you’ve seen it, but he kind of grilled your supermarket and subway videos. Have you got any chance to see it?
Tucker Carlson
I haven’t seen it, but someone characterized it to me, which is why I pivoted against it early in our conversation about how the price of freedom is living in filth and chaos.
I haven’t seen it, but someone characterized it to me, which is why I pivoted against it early in our conversation about how the price of freedom is living in filth and chaos.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, that was essentially it. So in 2004, that’s 20 years ago, Jon Stewart appeared on Crossfire, a show you hosted. That was kind of a memorable moment. Can you tell the saga of that as you remember it?
Yeah, that was essentially it. So in 2004, that’s 20 years ago, Jon Stewart appeared on Crossfire, a show you hosted. That was kind of a memorable moment. Can you tell the saga of that as you remember it?
Tucker Carlson
I mean, for me, as I was saying to you before about how it takes a long time to digest and process and understand what happens to you, or at least it does for me, I didn’t understand that as a particularly significant moment while it was happening. I just got off a plane from Hawaii. I mean, I was out of it as usual, and I was very literal as usual. So from my perspective, his criticism of me, to the extent I remember it, was that I was a partisan. Well, he had two critiques. One that Crossfire was stupid, which it certainly was. In fact, I’d already given my notice and I was moving on to another company by that point.
I mean, for me, as I was saying to you before about how it takes a long time to digest and process and understand what happens to you, or at least it does for me, I didn’t understand that as a particularly significant moment while it was happening. I just got off a plane from Hawaii. I mean, I was out of it as usual, and I was very literal as usual. So from my perspective, his criticism of me, to the extent I remember it, was that I was a partisan. Well, he had two critiques. One that Crossfire was stupid, which it certainly was. In fact, I’d already given my notice and I was moving on to another company by that point.
Crossfire was stupid. Crossfire didn’t help. Crossfire framed everything as Republican versus Democrat, whatever. It was not helpful to the public discourse. I couldn’t agree more, and that’s why I left. So that was part of his critique, fair. I’m not sure I would’ve admitted it at the time because I worked there and it’s sort of hard to admit you’re engaged in an enterprise that’s fundamentally worthless, which it was. But his other point was that I was somehow a partisan or a mindless partisan, which is definitely not true. It is true of him. He is a mindless partisan, but I’m not.
I really haven’t been since I got back from Baghdad at the beginning of the Iraq War, and I realized that the Republican party, which I’d voted for my whole life to that point, and had supported in general, was pushing this really horrible thing that was going to hurt the United States, which in time it really did. The Iraq War really hurt the United States. I realized that I had been on the wrong side of that. I said so publicly immediately from Baghdad, I said that to the New York Times and I really meant it. I mean it now. So to call me partisan, you can call me stupid, you can call me wrong, I certainly had been wrong, but partisan, I just didn’t think it was a meaningful… I mean, that’s just not true. It’s the opposite of true.
So I didn’t really take it seriously at all, and I never thought much of him. So I was like, “Whatever. Some buffoon jumping around on my show grandstanding.” By the way, that happened right at the moment that YouTube began. I think that was one of the first big YouTube, it was one of the first big YouTube videos. So it had a virality that, if that’s a word, it went everywhere in a way that didn’t used to happen in cable news. I mean, by that point, that was 20 years ago as you point out, I’ve been in cable news for nine years. So before 2004, we would say something on television and then it would be lost. People could claim they heard it, but you’d have to go to I think the University of Tennessee at Knoxville archives to get it.
Suddenly everything we said would live forever on the internet, which is good, by the way. That’s not bad. But it was a big change for me, and I just couldn’t believe how widely that was discussed at the time, because I thought he was not an interesting person, I think he’s obviously a very unhappy person. I just didn’t take him seriously then and I don’t now. But so anyway, that was it. It was a smaller thing in my life at the time than other people imagined.
Lex Fridman
Okay, you said lot of words that will make it sound like you’re a bit bitter even if you’re not. So you said unhappy person, partisan person.
Okay, you said lot of words that will make it sound like you’re a bit bitter even if you’re not. So you said unhappy person, partisan person.
Tucker Carlson
Well, I think he’s an unhappy guy. Well, he’s definitely partisan for sure.
Well, I think he’s an unhappy guy. Well, he’s definitely partisan for sure.
Lex Fridman
So can you elaborate why you think he’s partisan?
So can you elaborate why you think he’s partisan?
Tucker Carlson
Well, so I think that, and I see this a lot, not only on the left, but people who believe that whatever political debate they’re engaged in is the most important debate in the world. So they bring an emotional intensity to those debates, and they’re inevitably disappointed because no eternal question is solved politically. So they’re kind of on the wrong path and they’re doomed to frustration if they believe that, and many do. He certainly does, that whatever the issue is, so Clarence Thomas should not be Supreme Court justice, and the implication is, well, if someone else’s Supreme Court justice, we’ll live in a fair and happy society, but that’s just not… It’s a false promise.
Well, so I think that, and I see this a lot, not only on the left, but people who believe that whatever political debate they’re engaged in is the most important debate in the world. So they bring an emotional intensity to those debates, and they’re inevitably disappointed because no eternal question is solved politically. So they’re kind of on the wrong path and they’re doomed to frustration if they believe that, and many do. He certainly does, that whatever the issue is, so Clarence Thomas should not be Supreme Court justice, and the implication is, well, if someone else’s Supreme Court justice, we’ll live in a fair and happy society, but that’s just not… It’s a false promise.
So I think that people who bring that level of intensity to politics are, by definition, bitter, by definition, disappointed, bitter in the way the disappointed people are. That the real questions are like what happens when you die and how do the people around you feel about you? Those are not the only questions in life, but they’re certainly the most important ones. If we’re spending a disproportionate amount of time on who gets elected to some office, not that it’s irrelevant, it is relevant, but it’s not the eternal question. So I feel like he’s not the only kind of bitter silly person in Washington or in its orbit. There are many, and a lot of them are Republicans, so.
But I just thought it was ironic. I mean, everything’s ironic to me, but being called a Russia’s sympathizer by a guy who calls himself Boris, it just made me laugh. No one else has ever laughed at that. Boris Johnson’s real name is not Boris, as you know. He calls himself Boris. It’s his middle name. So if you call yourself Boris, you don’t really have standing to attack anyone else as a Russia defender, right? I think that’s funny. No one else, as I noted does. But Jon Stewart, there are a lot of things you could say about me, but he’s much more partisan than I am. So to call me a partisan, it’s like what?
Lex Fridman
He would probably say that he’s not a partisan, that he’s a comedian who’s looking for the humor and the absurdity of the system on both sides.
He would probably say that he’s not a partisan, that he’s a comedian who’s looking for the humor and the absurdity of the system on both sides.
Tucker Carlson
He’s a very serious person. I will say this, and he shares this quality with a lot of comedians, I know a lot of comedians, I know a cross section of people just having done this job for a long time, and a lot of them are very serious about their views, and they have a lot of emotional intensity. He certainly is in that category. That’s the silliest thing. Yeah, he’s a comedian for sure. He can be very funny for sure. He has talent, no doubt about it. I’ve never denied that. But he’s motivated by his moral views, “This is right. That is wrong.” I just think that it’s a misapplied passion.
He’s a very serious person. I will say this, and he shares this quality with a lot of comedians, I know a lot of comedians, I know a cross section of people just having done this job for a long time, and a lot of them are very serious about their views, and they have a lot of emotional intensity. He certainly is in that category. That’s the silliest thing. Yeah, he’s a comedian for sure. He can be very funny for sure. He has talent, no doubt about it. I’ve never denied that. But he’s motivated by his moral views, “This is right. That is wrong.” I just think that it’s a misapplied passion.
Lex Fridman
Do you think I’m just a comedian? Is-
Do you think I’m just a comedian? Is-
Tucker Carlson
I don’t think any person thinks that. I mean, if you’re just a comedian, and I, look, I’m not trying to claim, I couldn’t claim that I haven’t said a lot of dumb things, and one of the dumbest things I ever said was when he was on our set lecturing me, he’s a moralizer, which I also don’t really care for as an aesthetic matter, but he was lecturing me about something and I said, “I thought you’re here to tell jokes.” Which I shouldn’t have said because he wasn’t there to tell jokes. He was there to lecture me, and I should have just engaged it directly rather than trying to diminish him by like, “You’re just a little comedian.” Well, he doesn’t see himself that way. But I would just say this, Jon Stewart’s a defender of power. Jon Stewart has never criticized… What’s Jon Stewart’s view on the aid we’ve sent to Ukraine, the $100 billion or whatever. What happened to that money? What happened to the weapons that it bought? He doesn’t care. He has the exact same priorities as the people permanently in charge in Washington. So whatever. He’s not alone in that. So does Mika Brzezinski and her husband and all the rest of the cast of dummies.
I don’t think any person thinks that. I mean, if you’re just a comedian, and I, look, I’m not trying to claim, I couldn’t claim that I haven’t said a lot of dumb things, and one of the dumbest things I ever said was when he was on our set lecturing me, he’s a moralizer, which I also don’t really care for as an aesthetic matter, but he was lecturing me about something and I said, “I thought you’re here to tell jokes.” Which I shouldn’t have said because he wasn’t there to tell jokes. He was there to lecture me, and I should have just engaged it directly rather than trying to diminish him by like, “You’re just a little comedian.” Well, he doesn’t see himself that way. But I would just say this, Jon Stewart’s a defender of power. Jon Stewart has never criticized… What’s Jon Stewart’s view on the aid we’ve sent to Ukraine, the $100 billion or whatever. What happened to that money? What happened to the weapons that it bought? He doesn’t care. He has the exact same priorities as the people permanently in charge in Washington. So whatever. He’s not alone in that. So does Mika Brzezinski and her husband and all the rest of the cast of dummies.
But if you’re going to pretend to be the guy who’s giving the finger to entrenched power, you should do it once in a while, and he never has. There’s not one time when he said something that would be deeply unpopular on Morning Joe. That’s all I’m saying. So don’t call yourself a truth teller. You’re a court comedian or a flatterer of power. Okay, that’s fine. There’s a role for that, but don’t pretend to be something else.
Lex Fridman
I’ll just be honest that I watched it just recently, that video and-
I’ll just be honest that I watched it just recently, that video and-
Tucker Carlson
From 20 years ago?
From 20 years ago?
Lex Fridman
From 20 years ago. I watched it initially, and I remember it very differently. I remembered that Jon Stewart completely destroyed you in that conversation. I watched it and you asked a very good question of him, and there was no destruction, first of all. You asked a very good question of him, “Why when you got a chance to interview John Kerry, did you ask a bunch of softball questions?”
From 20 years ago. I watched it initially, and I remember it very differently. I remembered that Jon Stewart completely destroyed you in that conversation. I watched it and you asked a very good question of him, and there was no destruction, first of all. You asked a very good question of him, “Why when you got a chance to interview John Kerry, did you ask a bunch of softball questions?”
Tucker Carlson
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
I thought that was a really fair question. Then his defense was, “Well, I’m just a comedian.”
I thought that was a really fair question. Then his defense was, “Well, I’m just a comedian.”
Tucker Carlson
So I thought that was disingenuous. I haven’t watched it. I never have watched the clip one time in my life, and I don’t like to watch myself on television. I never have. That’s my fault and I probably should force myself to watch it though, of course I never will. But I think the takeaway for me, which was really interesting and life-changing, was I agree with your assessment. I’ve lost a lot of debates. I’ve been humiliated on television. I’m not above that. It certainly happened to me. It will happen again. But I didn’t feel like it was a clear win for him at all. Maybe A TKO, but it was not a knockout at all, and yet it was recorded that way.
So I thought that was disingenuous. I haven’t watched it. I never have watched the clip one time in my life, and I don’t like to watch myself on television. I never have. That’s my fault and I probably should force myself to watch it though, of course I never will. But I think the takeaway for me, which was really interesting and life-changing, was I agree with your assessment. I’ve lost a lot of debates. I’ve been humiliated on television. I’m not above that. It certainly happened to me. It will happen again. But I didn’t feel like it was a clear win for him at all. Maybe A TKO, but it was not a knockout at all, and yet it was recorded that way.
I remember thinking, “Well, that’s kind of weird. That’s not what I remember.” Then I realized, no, Jon Stewart was more popular than I was, therefore he was recorded as the winner. That was hard for me to accept, because that struck me as unfair. You should rate any contest on points. Here are the rules. We’re going to judge the contest in the basis of those rules. No, in the end, it’s just like the more popular guy wins. Every TV critic like Jon Stewart, every one of them hated me, therefore he won. I was like, “Wow, I guess I have to accept that reality.” You do, like the reality of the sunrise. You’re not in charge of it. So that’s just what it is.
Lex Fridman
Unfortunately it’s a bit darker, I think. The reason he’s seen as the winner and the reason at the time I saw as the “winner” is because he was basically shitting on you, like personal attacks versus engaging ideas. It was funny in a dark way and making fun of the bow tie and all this kind of stuff.
Unfortunately it’s a bit darker, I think. The reason he’s seen as the winner and the reason at the time I saw as the “winner” is because he was basically shitting on you, like personal attacks versus engaging ideas. It was funny in a dark way and making fun of the bow tie and all this kind of stuff.
Tucker Carlson
That’s fair, the bow tie.
That’s fair, the bow tie.
Lex Fridman
I understand.
I understand.
Tucker Carlson
It was fair to call me a dick. I remember he called me a dick, and I remember even when he said that, I was like, “Yeah, I’m definitely a dick, and that’s not my best quality, trust me.”
It was fair to call me a dick. I remember he called me a dick, and I remember even when he said that, I was like, “Yeah, I’m definitely a dick, and that’s not my best quality, trust me.”
Lex Fridman
I thought Jon Stewart came off as a giant dick at that time, and I’m a big fan of his, and I think he has improved a lot.
I thought Jon Stewart came off as a giant dick at that time, and I’m a big fan of his, and I think he has improved a lot.
Tucker Carlson
That may be true.
That may be true.
Lex Fridman
So we should also say that people grow, people like-
So we should also say that people grow, people like-
Tucker Carlson
Well, I certainly have, or changed anyway. You hope it’s growth. You hope it’s not shrinkage, but-
Well, I certainly have, or changed anyway. You hope it’s growth. You hope it’s not shrinkage, but-
Lex Fridman
It is cold outside.
It is cold outside.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah. I mean, look, I haven’t followed Jon Stewart’s career at all. I don’t have a television. I’m pretty cut off from all that stuff, so I wouldn’t really know. But the measure to me is, are you taking positions that are unpopular with the most powerful people in the world and how often are you doing it? It’s super simple. Not for its own sake, but do you feel free enough to say to the consensus, “I disagree.” If you don’t, then you’re just another toady. That’s my view.
Yeah. I mean, look, I haven’t followed Jon Stewart’s career at all. I don’t have a television. I’m pretty cut off from all that stuff, so I wouldn’t really know. But the measure to me is, are you taking positions that are unpopular with the most powerful people in the world and how often are you doing it? It’s super simple. Not for its own sake, but do you feel free enough to say to the consensus, “I disagree.” If you don’t, then you’re just another toady. That’s my view.
Lex Fridman
Well, I think he probably feels free enough to do it, but you’re saying he doesn’t do it.
Well, I think he probably feels free enough to do it, but you’re saying he doesn’t do it.
Tucker Carlson
On the big things. Look, the big things, this is my estimation of it, others may disagree, the big things are the economy and war, okay? The big things government does can be, I mean, there are a lot of things government does, government does everything at this point, but where we kill people and how and for what purpose and how we organize the economic engine that keeps the country afloat, those are the two big questions. I hear almost no debate about either one of them in the media, and I have dissenting views on both of them. I mean, I’m mad about the tax code, which I think is unfair.
On the big things. Look, the big things, this is my estimation of it, others may disagree, the big things are the economy and war, okay? The big things government does can be, I mean, there are a lot of things government does, government does everything at this point, but where we kill people and how and for what purpose and how we organize the economic engine that keeps the country afloat, those are the two big questions. I hear almost no debate about either one of them in the media, and I have dissenting views on both of them. I mean, I’m mad about the tax code, which I think is unfair.
The fact that we’ve a carried interest loophole in the tax code and people are claiming that their income is investment, income and they’re paying half the tax rate as someone who just goes to work every day, it discourages work. It encourages lending at interest, which I think is gross, personally. I’m against it. Sorry. The fact that we’re creating chaos around the world is the saddest thing that’s happening right now. Nobody feels free to say that. So that’s not good.
Ending the War in Ukraine
Lex Fridman
How do you hope the war on Ukraine ends?
How do you hope the war on Ukraine ends?
Tucker Carlson
With a settlement, with a reasonable settlement. You know what a reasonable settlement is, which is a settlement where both sides feel like they’re giving a little, but can live with it. I mean, I was really struck in my conversation with Putin by how he basically refused to criticize Joe Biden and to criticize NATO. I will just be honest, as an American, it would be a little weird to be pissing on Joe Biden with a foreign leader, any foreign leader, even though I don’t think Joe Biden is a real person or really a president. I mean, the whole thing is ridiculous. But still, he is the American president technically, and I don’t want to beat up on the American president with a foreigner. I just don’t. Maybe I’m old fashioned. So that’s how I feel.
With a settlement, with a reasonable settlement. You know what a reasonable settlement is, which is a settlement where both sides feel like they’re giving a little, but can live with it. I mean, I was really struck in my conversation with Putin by how he basically refused to criticize Joe Biden and to criticize NATO. I will just be honest, as an American, it would be a little weird to be pissing on Joe Biden with a foreign leader, any foreign leader, even though I don’t think Joe Biden is a real person or really a president. I mean, the whole thing is ridiculous. But still, he is the American president technically, and I don’t want to beat up on the American president with a foreigner. I just don’t. Maybe I’m old fashioned. So that’s how I feel.
So I didn’t push it, but I thought it was really interesting. Because, of course, Putin knows my views on Joe Biden. He knew I applied to the CIA, so they’ve done some digging on me, but he didn’t mention it, and he didn’t attack NATO. The reason is, I know for a fact, because he wants a settlement. He wants a settlement not because Russia’s about to collapse despite the lying of our media, that’s just not true, and no one is even saying it anymore because it’s so dumb. He wants to because it’s just bad to have a war. It changes the world in ways you can’t predict. People die. Everything about it is sad. If you can avoid it, you should.
So I would like to see a settlement where, look, the thing that Russia wants and I think probably has a right to is not to have NATO missiles on its border. I don’t know why we would do that. I don’t know what we get out of it. I just don’t even understand it. I don’t understand the purpose of NATO. I don’t think NATO is good for the United States. I think it’s an attack on our sovereignty. I would pull out of NATO immediately if I were the U.S. president, because I don’t think it helps the U.S. I know a lot of people are getting their bread buttered by NATO. But anyway, that’s my view as an American.
If I’m a Russian or a Ukrainian, let’s just be sovereign countries now. We’re not run by the U.S. State Department. We’re just our own countries. I believe in sovereignty, okay? So that’s my view. I also want to say one thing about Zelensky. I attacked him before because I was so offended by his cavalier talk about nuclear exchange because it would kill my family. So I’m really offended by that. Anyone who talks that way I’m offended by. But I do feel for Zelensky. I do. He didn’t run for president to have this happen.
I think Zelensky’s been completely misused by the State Department, by Toria Nuland, by our Secretary of State, by the policymakers in the U.S. who’ve used Ukraine as a vessel for their ambitions, their geopolitical ambitions, but also the many American businesses who’ve used Ukraine as a way to fleece the American taxpayer, and then by just independent ghouls like Boris Johnson who are hoping to get rich from interviews on it. The whole thing, Zelensky is at the center of this. He’s not driving history. NATO and the United States is driving history. Putin is driving history. There’s this guy, Zelensky. So I do feel for him, and I think he’s in a perilous place.
Lex Fridman
Do you think Zelensky is a hero for staying in Kiev? Because I do. To me, you can criticize a lot of things. You should call out things that are obviously positive.
Do you think Zelensky is a hero for staying in Kiev? Because I do. To me, you can criticize a lot of things. You should call out things that are obviously positive.
Tucker Carlson
I just tried to a second ago, I don’t know the extent that he is in Kiev. He seems to be in the United States an awful lot, way too much. You can do a satellite interview. You don’t have to speak to my Congress. You’re not an American. Please leave. That’s my opinion but-
I just tried to a second ago, I don’t know the extent that he is in Kiev. He seems to be in the United States an awful lot, way too much. You can do a satellite interview. You don’t have to speak to my Congress. You’re not an American. Please leave. That’s my opinion but-
Lex Fridman
You got many zingers, Tucker.
You got many zingers, Tucker.
Tucker Carlson
No, no, no. It’s just heartfelt. It’s bubbling up from the wellspring that never turns off. But I would say this about Zelensky, yeah, to the extent he’s in Ukraine, good man. George W. Bush fled Washington on 9/11. I lived there with three kids and he ran away to some Air Force base in South Dakota. I thought that was cowardly and I said so at the time, and man was I attacked for saying that. I wrote a column about it in New York Magazine where I then had a column, hard to believe. But I felt that. I felt that. I think the prerequisites of leadership are really basic.
No, no, no. It’s just heartfelt. It’s bubbling up from the wellspring that never turns off. But I would say this about Zelensky, yeah, to the extent he’s in Ukraine, good man. George W. Bush fled Washington on 9/11. I lived there with three kids and he ran away to some Air Force base in South Dakota. I thought that was cowardly and I said so at the time, and man was I attacked for saying that. I wrote a column about it in New York Magazine where I then had a column, hard to believe. But I felt that. I felt that. I think the prerequisites of leadership are really basic.
The first is caring about the people you lead, that’s number one. In the way a father cares for his children, or an officer cares for his troops. A president should care for his people. That leads inexorably to the next requirement, which is bravery, physical courage. I believe in that. I’m not like some tough guy, but I just think it’s obvious. If you’re in charge, I’m at my house and I feel like someone broke in, I’m not going to say to my wife, “Hey, baby, go deal with the home invasion.” I’m going to deal with it because I’m dad. Okay? So if you’re the president of a country and your capital city is attacked, as ours was at the Pentagon, and you run away?
“The Secret Service told me to.” Bitch, are you in charge? Who’s daddy here? The Secret Service? Do you know what I mean? I found that totally contemptible and I said so, and man, did I get a lecture, not just from Republicans, but from Democrats. “Oh, you don’t know. Put yourself in that position.” I was like, “Okay.” I don’t know what I would do under that kind of stress, enormous stress. I get it. I know one thing I wouldn’t do is run away because you can’t do that. If you’re not willing to die for your country, then you shouldn’t be leading it. So yes, to the extent, if Zelensky really is in Ukraine most of the time, amen.
Lex Fridman
Well, hold on a second. Let’s clarify. It’s not about what he’s in Ukraine most of the time or not.
Well, hold on a second. Let’s clarify. It’s not about what he’s in Ukraine most of the time or not.
Tucker Carlson
Well, I thought that was the whole premise of the problem.
Well, I thought that was the whole premise of the problem.
Lex Fridman
No, at the beginning of the war, when a lot of people thought that the second biggest military in the world is pointing its guns in Kiev, is going to be taken. A man, a leader who stays in that city and says, “Fuck it.” When everybody around him says, flee, everybody around him believes the city will be taken or at least destroyed, leveled, artillery, bombs, all of this, he chooses to stay. You know a lot of leaders, how many leaders would choose to stay?
No, at the beginning of the war, when a lot of people thought that the second biggest military in the world is pointing its guns in Kiev, is going to be taken. A man, a leader who stays in that city and says, “Fuck it.” When everybody around him says, flee, everybody around him believes the city will be taken or at least destroyed, leveled, artillery, bombs, all of this, he chooses to stay. You know a lot of leaders, how many leaders would choose to stay?
Tucker Carlson
Well, the leader of Afghanistan, the U.S. backed leader when the Taliban came, got in a U.S. plane with U.S. dollars and ran away, and of course is living on those dollars now. So yeah, there’s a lot of cowardly behavior. Good for him. I mean, I guess I’m looking at it slightly differently, which is what’s the option? You’re the leader of the country. You can’t leave. Stalin never left Moscow during the war. It was surrounded by the Germans, as you know, for a year, and he didn’t leave. When I was in Russia, they’re like, “Stalin never left.” It’s like he’s the leader of the country, you can’t. I mean, that’s just table stakes, of course. I would say, but you raised an interesting by implication question, which is what about Kiev? You think the Russians couldn’t level Kiev? Of course, obviously they could. Why haven’t? They could, but they haven’t.
Well, the leader of Afghanistan, the U.S. backed leader when the Taliban came, got in a U.S. plane with U.S. dollars and ran away, and of course is living on those dollars now. So yeah, there’s a lot of cowardly behavior. Good for him. I mean, I guess I’m looking at it slightly differently, which is what’s the option? You’re the leader of the country. You can’t leave. Stalin never left Moscow during the war. It was surrounded by the Germans, as you know, for a year, and he didn’t leave. When I was in Russia, they’re like, “Stalin never left.” It’s like he’s the leader of the country, you can’t. I mean, that’s just table stakes, of course. I would say, but you raised an interesting by implication question, which is what about Kiev? You think the Russians couldn’t level Kiev? Of course, obviously they could. Why haven’t? They could, but they haven’t.
Lex Fridman
Well, there’s military answers to that, which is urban warfare is extremely difficult.
Well, there’s military answers to that, which is urban warfare is extremely difficult.
Tucker Carlson
Do you think that Putin wants to take Kiev?
Do you think that Putin wants to take Kiev?
Lex Fridman
No, I do think he expected Zelensky to flee and somebody else to come into power.
No, I do think he expected Zelensky to flee and somebody else to come into power.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah, that may be totally right. I don’t know. I have no idea what Putin was thinking when he did that about Zelensky. I didn’t ask him. But it’s a mistake to imagine this is a contest between Putin and Zelensky. This is Putin versus the U.S. State Department. That’s why I said I felt sorry for him. I mean, as I said, we’re literally paying the pensions of Ukrainian bureaucrats. So there is no Ukrainian government independent of the U.S. government. Maybe you’re for that, maybe you’re against it, but you can’t endorse that in the same sentence that you use the term democracy, because that’s not a democracy, obviously.
Yeah, that may be totally right. I don’t know. I have no idea what Putin was thinking when he did that about Zelensky. I didn’t ask him. But it’s a mistake to imagine this is a contest between Putin and Zelensky. This is Putin versus the U.S. State Department. That’s why I said I felt sorry for him. I mean, as I said, we’re literally paying the pensions of Ukrainian bureaucrats. So there is no Ukrainian government independent of the U.S. government. Maybe you’re for that, maybe you’re against it, but you can’t endorse that in the same sentence that you use the term democracy, because that’s not a democracy, obviously.
Lex Fridman
Well, that’s why it’s interesting that he didn’t really bring up NATO extensively.
Well, that’s why it’s interesting that he didn’t really bring up NATO extensively.
Tucker Carlson
He wants a settlement, he wants a settlement. He doesn’t want to fight with them rhetorically and he just wants to get this done. He made a bunch of offers at the peace deal. We wouldn’t even know this happened if the Israelis hadn’t told us. I’m so grateful that they did that, that Johnson was dispatched by the State Department to stop it. I mean, I think Boris Johnson is a husk of a man. But imagine if you were Boris Johnson and you spend your whole life with Ukraine flag, “I’m for Ukraine,” and then all those kids died because of what you did, and the lines haven’t really moved. It hasn’t been a victory for Ukraine. It’s not going to be a victory for Ukraine. It’s like, how do you feel about yourself if you did that? I mean, I’ve done a lot of shitty things in my life, I feel bad about them, but I’ve never extended a war for no reason. That’s a pretty grave sin in my opinion.
He wants a settlement, he wants a settlement. He doesn’t want to fight with them rhetorically and he just wants to get this done. He made a bunch of offers at the peace deal. We wouldn’t even know this happened if the Israelis hadn’t told us. I’m so grateful that they did that, that Johnson was dispatched by the State Department to stop it. I mean, I think Boris Johnson is a husk of a man. But imagine if you were Boris Johnson and you spend your whole life with Ukraine flag, “I’m for Ukraine,” and then all those kids died because of what you did, and the lines haven’t really moved. It hasn’t been a victory for Ukraine. It’s not going to be a victory for Ukraine. It’s like, how do you feel about yourself if you did that? I mean, I’ve done a lot of shitty things in my life, I feel bad about them, but I’ve never extended a war for no reason. That’s a pretty grave sin in my opinion.
Lex Fridman
Yes, that was a failure. But it doesn’t mean you can’t have a success over and over and over keep having negotiations between leaders.
Yes, that was a failure. But it doesn’t mean you can’t have a success over and over and over keep having negotiations between leaders.
Tucker Carlson
Well, the U.S. government’s not allowing negotiations. So that for me is the most upsetting part. It’s like in the end, what Russia does, I’m not implicated in that. What Ukraine does, I’m not implicated in that. I’m not Russian or Ukrainian. I’m an American who grew up really believing in my country. I’m supporting my country through my tax dollars. It’s like I really care about what the U.S. government does because they’re doing it in my name, and I care a lot because I’m American. We are the impediment to peace, which is another way of saying we are responsible for all these innocent people getting dragooned out of public parks in Kiev and sent to go die. What? That is not good. I’m ashamed of it.
Well, the U.S. government’s not allowing negotiations. So that for me is the most upsetting part. It’s like in the end, what Russia does, I’m not implicated in that. What Ukraine does, I’m not implicated in that. I’m not Russian or Ukrainian. I’m an American who grew up really believing in my country. I’m supporting my country through my tax dollars. It’s like I really care about what the U.S. government does because they’re doing it in my name, and I care a lot because I’m American. We are the impediment to peace, which is another way of saying we are responsible for all these innocent people getting dragooned out of public parks in Kiev and sent to go die. What? That is not good. I’m ashamed of it.
Nazis
Lex Fridman
What do you think of Putin saying that justification for continuing the war is denazification?
What do you think of Putin saying that justification for continuing the war is denazification?
Tucker Carlson
I thought it was one of the dumbest things I’d ever heard. I didn’t understand what it meant. Denazification?
I thought it was one of the dumbest things I’d ever heard. I didn’t understand what it meant. Denazification?
Lex Fridman
It literally means what it sounds like.
It literally means what it sounds like.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah. I mean, I have a lot of thoughts on this. I hate that whole conversation because it’s not real. It’s just ad hominem. It’s a way of associating someone with an evil regime that doesn’t exist anymore. But in point of fact, Nazism, whatever it was, is inseparable from the German nation. It was a nationalist movement in Germany. There were no other Nazis, right? There’s no book of Nazism like, “I want to be a Nazi. What does it mean to be a Nazi?” I mean, Mein Kampf is not Das Kapital, right? Mein Kampf is, to the extent I understand it, it’s like he’s pissed about the Treaty of Versailles, whatever. I’m very anti-Nazi. I’m merely saying there isn’t a Nazi movement in 2024. It’s a way of calling people evil.
Yeah. I mean, I have a lot of thoughts on this. I hate that whole conversation because it’s not real. It’s just ad hominem. It’s a way of associating someone with an evil regime that doesn’t exist anymore. But in point of fact, Nazism, whatever it was, is inseparable from the German nation. It was a nationalist movement in Germany. There were no other Nazis, right? There’s no book of Nazism like, “I want to be a Nazi. What does it mean to be a Nazi?” I mean, Mein Kampf is not Das Kapital, right? Mein Kampf is, to the extent I understand it, it’s like he’s pissed about the Treaty of Versailles, whatever. I’m very anti-Nazi. I’m merely saying there isn’t a Nazi movement in 2024. It’s a way of calling people evil.
Okay. Putin doesn’t like nationalist Ukrainians. Putin hates nationalism in general, which is interesting. Of course he does. He’s got 80 whatever republics, and he’s afraid of nationalist movements. He fought a war in Chechnya over this. So I understand it, but I have a different… I’m for nationalism, I’m for American nationalism, so I disagree with Putin on that. But calling them Nazis, it’s like, I thought it was childish.
Lex Fridman
Well, I do believe that he believes it.
Well, I do believe that he believes it.
Tucker Carlson
So that’s so interesting. I agree with that. Because I was listening to this because in the United States, everyone’s always calling everyone else a Nazi, “You’re a Nazi.” But I was listening to this and I was like, “This is the dumbest sort of not convincing line you could take.” I sat there and listened to him talk about Nazis for eight minutes, and I’m like, “I think he believes this.”
So that’s so interesting. I agree with that. Because I was listening to this because in the United States, everyone’s always calling everyone else a Nazi, “You’re a Nazi.” But I was listening to this and I was like, “This is the dumbest sort of not convincing line you could take.” I sat there and listened to him talk about Nazis for eight minutes, and I’m like, “I think he believes this.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Having had a bunch of conversations with people who are living in Russia, they also believe it. Now, there’s technicalities here, which the word Nazi, World War II is deeply in the blood of a lot of Russians and Ukrainians.
Yeah. Having had a bunch of conversations with people who are living in Russia, they also believe it. Now, there’s technicalities here, which the word Nazi, World War II is deeply in the blood of a lot of Russians and Ukrainians.
Tucker Carlson
I get it. I get it.
I get it. I get it.
Lex Fridman
So you’re using it as almost a political term, the way it’s used in the United States also, like racism and all this kind of stuff. Because you know you can really touch people if you use the Nazi term.
So you’re using it as almost a political term, the way it’s used in the United States also, like racism and all this kind of stuff. Because you know you can really touch people if you use the Nazi term.
Tucker Carlson
I think that’s totally right.
I think that’s totally right.
Lex Fridman
But it’s also to me a really disgusting thing to do.
But it’s also to me a really disgusting thing to do.
Tucker Carlson
I agree.
I agree.
Lex Fridman
Also to clarify, there is neo-Nazi movements in Ukraine but it’s very small. You’re saying that there’s this distinction between Nazi and neo-Nazi, sure. But it’s a small percentage of the population, a tiny percentage that have no power in government, as far I have seen no data to show they have any influence on Zelensky and Zelensky government at all. So really, when Putin says denazification, I think he means nationalist movements.
Also to clarify, there is neo-Nazi movements in Ukraine but it’s very small. You’re saying that there’s this distinction between Nazi and neo-Nazi, sure. But it’s a small percentage of the population, a tiny percentage that have no power in government, as far I have seen no data to show they have any influence on Zelensky and Zelensky government at all. So really, when Putin says denazification, I think he means nationalist movements.
Tucker Carlson
I think you’re right. I agree with everything you said. I do think that the Second World War occupies a place in Slavic society, Polish society, Central Eastern Europe that it does not occupy in the United States. You can just look at the death totals, tens of millions versus less than half a million. So it’s like this eliminated a lot of the male population of these countries. So of course, it’s still resonant in those countries. I get it. I think I’ve watched, I don’t think I know, I’ve watched the misuse of words, the weaponization of words for political reasons for so long that I just don’t like, though I do engage in it sometime and I’m sorry, I don’t like just dismissing people in a word. “Oh, he’s a Nazi. He’s a liberal,” or whatever. It’s like, tell me what you mean, what don’t you like about what they’re doing or saying?
I think you’re right. I agree with everything you said. I do think that the Second World War occupies a place in Slavic society, Polish society, Central Eastern Europe that it does not occupy in the United States. You can just look at the death totals, tens of millions versus less than half a million. So it’s like this eliminated a lot of the male population of these countries. So of course, it’s still resonant in those countries. I get it. I think I’ve watched, I don’t think I know, I’ve watched the misuse of words, the weaponization of words for political reasons for so long that I just don’t like, though I do engage in it sometime and I’m sorry, I don’t like just dismissing people in a word. “Oh, he’s a Nazi. He’s a liberal,” or whatever. It’s like, tell me what you mean, what don’t you like about what they’re doing or saying?
Tucker Carlson
What don’t you like about what they’re doing or saying? And Nazi especially, I don’t even know what the hell you’re talking about.
What don’t you like about what they’re doing or saying? And Nazi especially, I don’t even know what the hell you’re talking about.
Lex Fridman
What troubled me about that is because he said that that’s the primary objective currently for the war. And that because it’s not grounded in reality, it makes it difficult to then negotiate peace. Because what does it mean to get rid of the Nazis in Ukraine? So he’ll come to the table and say, “Well, okay, I will agree to do a ceasefire once the Nazis are gone.” Okay, so can you list the Nazis?
What troubled me about that is because he said that that’s the primary objective currently for the war. And that because it’s not grounded in reality, it makes it difficult to then negotiate peace. Because what does it mean to get rid of the Nazis in Ukraine? So he’ll come to the table and say, “Well, okay, I will agree to do a ceasefire once the Nazis are gone.” Okay, so can you list the Nazis?
Tucker Carlson
I totally agree. Plus, can you negotiate with a Nazi?
I totally agree. Plus, can you negotiate with a Nazi?
Lex Fridman
Right, exactly.
Right, exactly.
Tucker Carlson
I totally agree with you.
I totally agree with you.
Lex Fridman
It was very strange. But maybe it perhaps had to do with speaking to his own population, and also probably trying to avoid the use of the word NATO as the justification for the war.
It was very strange. But maybe it perhaps had to do with speaking to his own population, and also probably trying to avoid the use of the word NATO as the justification for the war.
Tucker Carlson
Yes, that’s all… Of course, I don’t know, but I suspect you’re right on both counts. But I would say it points to something that I’ve thought more and more since I did that interview, which was two weeks ago, I guess. I didn’t think he was… As a PR guy, not very good, not good at telling his own story. The story of the current war in Ukraine is the eastward expansion of NATO scaring the shit out of the Russians with NATO expansion. Which is totally necessary, doesn’t help the United States, NATO itself doesn’t help the United States. And so I’m not pro-Russian for saying that, I’m pro-American for saying that. And I think that’s a really compelling story, because it’s true. He did not tell that story, he told some other story that I didn’t fully understand. Again, I’m not Russian.
Yes, that’s all… Of course, I don’t know, but I suspect you’re right on both counts. But I would say it points to something that I’ve thought more and more since I did that interview, which was two weeks ago, I guess. I didn’t think he was… As a PR guy, not very good, not good at telling his own story. The story of the current war in Ukraine is the eastward expansion of NATO scaring the shit out of the Russians with NATO expansion. Which is totally necessary, doesn’t help the United States, NATO itself doesn’t help the United States. And so I’m not pro-Russian for saying that, I’m pro-American for saying that. And I think that’s a really compelling story, because it’s true. He did not tell that story, he told some other story that I didn’t fully understand. Again, I’m not Russian.
He’s speaking to multiple audiences around the world. I’m not sure what he hoped to achieve by that interview, I will never know. But I did think that, this guy is not good at telling his story. And I also think honestly on the base of a lot… I mean, I know this. Very isolated during COVID, very.
We keep hearing that he’s dying of this or that disease, “He’s got ALS. I mean, I don’t know, I’m not his doctor. There’s a ton of lying about it, I know that. But one thing that’s not a lie, is that he was cloistered away during COVID, I know this, and only dealing with two or three people. And that makes you weird, it’s so important to deal with a lot of people to have your views challenged. And you see this with leaders who stay in power too long. He’s been in power 24 years, effectively. There’s been upsides I think for Russia, the Russian economy, Russian life expectancy, but there are definitely downsides. And one of them is you get weird, and you get autocratic, this is why we have term limits. Very few kings don’t get crazy in old age.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. And you said some of this also in your post-Kremlin discussion while you’re in Moscow still, which was very impressive to me, that you can just openly criticize. This was great.
Yeah. And you said some of this also in your post-Kremlin discussion while you’re in Moscow still, which was very impressive to me, that you can just openly criticize. This was great.
Tucker Carlson
Well, I don’t care.
Well, I don’t care.
Lex Fridman
I understand this. I just wish you did some more of that also with the supermarket video, and perhaps some more of that with Putin in front of you.
I understand this. I just wish you did some more of that also with the supermarket video, and perhaps some more of that with Putin in front of you.
Tucker Carlson
Putin in front of me, it would be like, “I’m such a good person.”
Putin in front of me, it would be like, “I’m such a good person.”
Lex Fridman
I know you see it as virtue signaling.
I know you see it as virtue signaling.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah, it is. Have you seen some of the interview he did with some NBC news child?
Yeah, it is. Have you seen some of the interview he did with some NBC news child?
Lex Fridman
Yes, I understand. So I think you’re just so annoyed by how bad journalists are, that you just didn’t want to be them.
Yes, I understand. So I think you’re just so annoyed by how bad journalists are, that you just didn’t want to be them.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah, that’s probably right actually.
Yeah, that’s probably right actually.
Lex Fridman
Some great conversations will involve some challenging. You were confused about denazification.
Some great conversations will involve some challenging. You were confused about denazification.
Tucker Carlson
Well, first of all, I accept your criticism, and I accept it as true, that in some way I’m probably pivoting against what I dislike. And I have such contempt for American journalists on the basis of so much knowledge, that I probably was like, “I don’t want to be like that.” Fair, that is a kind of defensiveness and dumb. So you’re right. As for the Nazi thing, I really felt like we were just speaking so far past each other that we would never come to… I was like, “I don’t even know what the hell you’re talking about.” And especially when I decided or concluded that he really meant it, I was like, “That’s just too freaking weird to me.” I can think of many other examples where you’re interviewing someone, and they’ll say something that’s like… I was interviewing a guy one time and he started talking about the Black Israelites and, “We’re the real Jews.” And it wasn’t on camera, but it was so far out to me that I was like, “We’ll never understand common terms on that.”
Well, first of all, I accept your criticism, and I accept it as true, that in some way I’m probably pivoting against what I dislike. And I have such contempt for American journalists on the basis of so much knowledge, that I probably was like, “I don’t want to be like that.” Fair, that is a kind of defensiveness and dumb. So you’re right. As for the Nazi thing, I really felt like we were just speaking so far past each other that we would never come to… I was like, “I don’t even know what the hell you’re talking about.” And especially when I decided or concluded that he really meant it, I was like, “That’s just too freaking weird to me.” I can think of many other examples where you’re interviewing someone, and they’ll say something that’s like… I was interviewing a guy one time and he started talking about the Black Israelites and, “We’re the real Jews.” And it wasn’t on camera, but it was so far out to me that I was like, “We’ll never understand common terms on that.”
Putin’s health
Lex Fridman
So you mentioned there’s a bunch of conspiracy theories about Putin’s health. How was he in person? What did he feel like? Did he look healthy?
So you mentioned there’s a bunch of conspiracy theories about Putin’s health. How was he in person? What did he feel like? Did he look healthy?
Tucker Carlson
I’m not a health person myself, so I can easily gain 30 pounds and not know it, so I’m probably not a great person to ask. But no, he seemed fine. He had his arm hooked through a chair, and I heard people say, “Well, he’s got Parkinson’s.” And Parkinson’s can be controlled I know for periods with drugs. So it’s hard to assess. One of the tells of Parkinson’s is gait, how a person walks, I think. And his walking seemed fine, and I walked around with him and talked to him off camera. He’s had some work done, for sure. He’s 71 or two.
I’m not a health person myself, so I can easily gain 30 pounds and not know it, so I’m probably not a great person to ask. But no, he seemed fine. He had his arm hooked through a chair, and I heard people say, “Well, he’s got Parkinson’s.” And Parkinson’s can be controlled I know for periods with drugs. So it’s hard to assess. One of the tells of Parkinson’s is gait, how a person walks, I think. And his walking seemed fine, and I walked around with him and talked to him off camera. He’s had some work done, for sure. He’s 71 or two.
Lex Fridman
You mean visual purposes?
You mean visual purposes?
Tucker Carlson
Yeah, I’m 54, he’s almost 20 years older than me, he looked younger than me.
Yeah, I’m 54, he’s almost 20 years older than me, he looked younger than me.
Lex Fridman
What was that like? The conversation off camera, you walking around with him, what was the content of the conversation?
What was that like? The conversation off camera, you walking around with him, what was the content of the conversation?
Tucker Carlson
I feel bad even with Putin or anybody talking about stuff that is off the record. But I’ll just say that when I said that he didn’t want to fight with NATO, or with the US State Department, or with Joe Biden because he wants a settlement, that’s a very informed perspective, he doesn’t. Say whatever you want about that, believe it or not, but that is true.
I feel bad even with Putin or anybody talking about stuff that is off the record. But I’ll just say that when I said that he didn’t want to fight with NATO, or with the US State Department, or with Joe Biden because he wants a settlement, that’s a very informed perspective, he doesn’t. Say whatever you want about that, believe it or not, but that is true.
Lex Fridman
So he’s open for peace, for peace negotiation?
So he’s open for peace, for peace negotiation?
Tucker Carlson
Russia tried to join NATO in 2000, that’s a fact. Okay, they tried to join NATO. So just think about this, NATO exists to keep Russia contained. It exists as a bulwark against Russian territorial expansion. And whether or not Russia has any territorial ambitions is another question. Why would it, it’s the largest landmass in the world? Whatever. But that’s why it exists. So if Russia seeks to join NATO, it is by definition a sign that NATO’s job is done here, we can declare victory and go home. The fact that they turned him down is so shocking to me, but it’s true. Then he approaches the next president, George W. Bush… That was with Bill Clinton at the end of his term in 2000. He approaches the next president and said, “In our next missile deal, let’s align on this, and we’ll designate Iran as our common enemy.” Iran, which is now effectively in league with Russia, thanks to our insane policies.
Russia tried to join NATO in 2000, that’s a fact. Okay, they tried to join NATO. So just think about this, NATO exists to keep Russia contained. It exists as a bulwark against Russian territorial expansion. And whether or not Russia has any territorial ambitions is another question. Why would it, it’s the largest landmass in the world? Whatever. But that’s why it exists. So if Russia seeks to join NATO, it is by definition a sign that NATO’s job is done here, we can declare victory and go home. The fact that they turned him down is so shocking to me, but it’s true. Then he approaches the next president, George W. Bush… That was with Bill Clinton at the end of his term in 2000. He approaches the next president and said, “In our next missile deal, let’s align on this, and we’ll designate Iran as our common enemy.” Iran, which is now effectively in league with Russia, thanks to our insane policies.
And George W. Bush to his credit is like, “Well, that seems like kind of an innovative good idea.” And Condi Rice, who’s one of the stupidest people ever to hold power in the United States, if I can say. Who’s monomaniacally anti-Russia because she had an advisor at Stanford who was, or something during the Cold War, “No, we can’t do that.” And Bush is just weak and so he agreed, it’s like, “What? That is crazy.” If you’re fighting with someone and the person says, “You know what? Actually our interests align. And you’ve spent 80% of your mental disc space on hating me and opposing me or whatever, but actually we can be on the same team.” If you don’t at least see that as progress, what?
If your interest is in helping your country, what’s the counter argument? I don’t even understand it. And no one has even addressed any of this, “The war of Russian aggression.” Yeah, it was a war of Russian aggression, for sure. But how did we get there? We got there because Joe Biden and Tony Blinken dispatched Kamala Harris, who does not freelance this stuff, fair to say, to the Munich Security Conference two years ago this month, February 2022. And said in a press conference to Zelenskyy, poor Zelenskyy, “We want you to join NATO.” This was not in a backroom, this was in public at a press conference, knowing because he said it 4,000 times, “We don’t want nuclear weapons from the United States or NATO on our western border.” Duh. And days later, he invaded. So what is that?
And I raised that question in my previous job, and I was denounced as of course a traitor or something. But okay, great, I’m a traitor. What’s the answer? What’s the answer? Toria Nuland, who I know, not dumb, hasn’t helped the US in any way, an architect of the Iraq war, architect of this disaster, one of the people who destroyed the US dollar. Okay, fine, but you’re not stupid. So you’re trying to get a war by acting that way, what’s the other explanation? By the way, NATO didn’t want Ukraine because it didn’t meet the criteria for admission. So why would you say that? Because you want a war, that’s why. And that war has enriched a lot of people to the tune of billions. So I don’t care if I sound like some kind of left-wing conspiracy nut, because I’m neither left-wing nor a conspiracy nut. Tell me how I’m wrong.
Lex Fridman
Who do you think is behind it? If you were to analyze, zoom out, looking at the entirety of human history, the military industrial complex, you said Kamala Harris, is it individuals? Is it this collective flock that people are just pro-war as a collective?
Who do you think is behind it? If you were to analyze, zoom out, looking at the entirety of human history, the military industrial complex, you said Kamala Harris, is it individuals? Is it this collective flock that people are just pro-war as a collective?
Tucker Carlson
It’s the hive mind. And I spent my whole life in DC from 85 to 2020, so 35 years. And again, I grew up around it in that world. And I do think that conspiracies… Of course, there are conspiracies. But in general, the hive mind is responsible for the worst decisions. It’s a bunch of people with the same views, views that have not been updated in decades. Putin said something that I thought was absolutely true, I don’t know how he would know this, but it is true because I lived among them. So the Soviet Union dissolves in August of 91 on my honeymoon in Bermuda, I’ll never forget it. And it was a big thing, if you lived in DC.
It’s the hive mind. And I spent my whole life in DC from 85 to 2020, so 35 years. And again, I grew up around it in that world. And I do think that conspiracies… Of course, there are conspiracies. But in general, the hive mind is responsible for the worst decisions. It’s a bunch of people with the same views, views that have not been updated in decades. Putin said something that I thought was absolutely true, I don’t know how he would know this, but it is true because I lived among them. So the Soviet Union dissolves in August of 91 on my honeymoon in Bermuda, I’ll never forget it. And it was a big thing, if you lived in DC.
I mean, the receptionist in my office in 1991 was getting a master’s in Russian from Georgetown, he was going to be a Sovietologist. And he was among thousands of people in Washington on that same track. And so the Soviet Union collapses, well, so does the rationale for a good portion of the US government, has been dedicated for over 40 years to opposing this thing that no longer exists. So there’s a lot of forward momentum, there’s a huge amount of money, the bulk of the money in the richest country in the world, aimed in this direction. And it’s very hard for people to readjust, to reassess. And you see this in life all the time.
I love my wife, all of a sudden she ran off with my best friend. Holy shit, I didn’t expect that this morning, now it’s a reality, how do I deal with that? Well, I got Stage 4 cancer diagnosis, and it’s all bad, but just saying that’s the nature of life. Things that you did not anticipate, never thought you’d have to face, happen out of nowhere, and you have to adjust your expectations and your goals. And people have a hard time with that, very hard time with that. So that’s a lot of it.
If you’re Condi Rice, sort of highly ambitious mid-wit, who gets this degree from Stanford, and you read Tolstoy in the original, sure you did. And you spent your whole life thinking that Russia is the center of evil in the world, it’s kind of hard to be like, “Well, actually there’s a new threat, and it’s coming from farther east. It’s primarily an economic threat.” And maybe all the threats aren’t reduced to tank battles, that’s the other thing. Is these people are so inelastic in their thinking, so lacking imagination and flexibility, that they can’t sort of imagine a new framework. And the new framework is not that you’re going to go to war with China over Formosa, Taiwan. No, the framework is that all of a sudden all the infrastructure in Tijuana is going to be built by China, and that’s a different kind of threat. But they can’t kind of get there because they’re not that impressive.
Lex Fridman
So you actually have mentioned this, it’s not just the Cold War, it’s World War II that populates most of their thinking in Washington. You mentioned Churchill, Chamberlain, and Hitler, and they’re kind of seeing the World War II as kind of the good war and successful role the United States played in that war. They’re kind of seeing that dynamic, that geopolitical dynamic, and applying it everywhere else still.
So you actually have mentioned this, it’s not just the Cold War, it’s World War II that populates most of their thinking in Washington. You mentioned Churchill, Chamberlain, and Hitler, and they’re kind of seeing the World War II as kind of the good war and successful role the United States played in that war. They’re kind of seeing that dynamic, that geopolitical dynamic, and applying it everywhere else still.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah, it’s a template for everything. And I think it’s of huge significance to the development of the West, to the civilization we live in now, to world history, was a world war. And so I think it’s worth knowing a lot about, and being honest about, and all the rest. But it’s hardly the sum total of human history, it’s a snapshot. And so you keep hearing people refer to… Not even the war, no one ever talks about the war. How much does Tony Blinken know about the Battle of Stalingrad? Probably zero, he doesn’t know anything. Largest battle in human history, but I bet he knows nothing. But he knows a lot about the cliches surrounding the ’38 to ’40 period, 1938 to 1940. And everything is kind of expressed through that formula. And not everything is that formula, that’s all I’m saying. And the Republicans have a strange weakness for it, particularly the closeted ones, the weird ones who have no life other than starting more wars. Everything to them, the most vulnerable, I would say, among them, emotionally, psychologically vulnerable, the dumbest, they will always say the same thing.
Yeah, it’s a template for everything. And I think it’s of huge significance to the development of the West, to the civilization we live in now, to world history, was a world war. And so I think it’s worth knowing a lot about, and being honest about, and all the rest. But it’s hardly the sum total of human history, it’s a snapshot. And so you keep hearing people refer to… Not even the war, no one ever talks about the war. How much does Tony Blinken know about the Battle of Stalingrad? Probably zero, he doesn’t know anything. Largest battle in human history, but I bet he knows nothing. But he knows a lot about the cliches surrounding the ’38 to ’40 period, 1938 to 1940. And everything is kind of expressed through that formula. And not everything is that formula, that’s all I’m saying. And the Republicans have a strange weakness for it, particularly the closeted ones, the weird ones who have no life other than starting more wars. Everything to them, the most vulnerable, I would say, among them, emotionally, psychologically vulnerable, the dumbest, they will always say the same thing.
And it appeals to Republican voters, unfortunately. That every problem is the result of weakness. Everyone’s Chamberlain, Germany never would’ve gone in to Poland, Czechoslovakia if England had been stronger, that’s the argument. Is that true? I don’t know, actually. Maybe, it might be totally true, it might not be true at all, I really don’t know. But not everything is that, that’s not always true. If I go up to you in a bar and I say, “I hate your neck tie.” I’m being pretty aggressive with you, pretty strong. You might beat the shit out of me actually, or shoot me if I do that. An aggressive posture doesn’t always get you the outcome that you want. Sometimes it requires a more sophisticated Mediterranean posture. I mean, it kind of depends, it’s a time and place thing. And they don’t acknowledge that, everything is this same template, and that’s not the road to good decision making at all.
Hitler
Lex Fridman
Since we’re on the time period, let me ask you a almost cliche question, but it applies to you, which you’ve interviewed a lot of world leaders. If you had the chance to interview Hitler in ’39, ’40, ’41, first of all, would you do it? And how would you do it? I assume you would do it given who you are.
Since we’re on the time period, let me ask you a almost cliche question, but it applies to you, which you’ve interviewed a lot of world leaders. If you had the chance to interview Hitler in ’39, ’40, ’41, first of all, would you do it? And how would you do it? I assume you would do it given who you are.
Tucker Carlson
Man, it would be a massive cost for doing it. It may destroy my life to interview Putin, though I can tell you as much as I want that I’m not a Putin defender, I only care about the United States. That’s 100% true, anyone who knows me will tell you what’s true, I keep saying it. But history may record me to the extent it records me at all as a tool of Putin, a hater of America. That seems absurd to me, but absurd things happen. What would I ask Hitler? I don’t even know. I guess I would probably ask him, what I asked Putin, which is what I ask everybody, “What’s your motive? Why did you do…” I mean, if he’d already gone into Poland, “Why are you doing that? What’s your goal?” And then the question is, is he going to answer honestly? I don’t know, you can’t make someone answer a question honestly. You can only sort of shut up while they talk and then let people decide what they think of the answer.
Man, it would be a massive cost for doing it. It may destroy my life to interview Putin, though I can tell you as much as I want that I’m not a Putin defender, I only care about the United States. That’s 100% true, anyone who knows me will tell you what’s true, I keep saying it. But history may record me to the extent it records me at all as a tool of Putin, a hater of America. That seems absurd to me, but absurd things happen. What would I ask Hitler? I don’t even know. I guess I would probably ask him, what I asked Putin, which is what I ask everybody, “What’s your motive? Why did you do…” I mean, if he’d already gone into Poland, “Why are you doing that? What’s your goal?” And then the question is, is he going to answer honestly? I don’t know, you can’t make someone answer a question honestly. You can only sort of shut up while they talk and then let people decide what they think of the answer.
Lex Fridman
Well, just like in the bar fight, there’s different ways.
Well, just like in the bar fight, there’s different ways.
Tucker Carlson
There are different ways, that’s exactly right. Man, is that true? That is absolutely right.
There are different ways, that’s exactly right. Man, is that true? That is absolutely right.
Lex Fridman
I mean, your energy with Putin, for example, was such that it felt like he could trust you. I felt like he could tell you a lot. I think…
I mean, your energy with Putin, for example, was such that it felt like he could trust you. I felt like he could tell you a lot. I think…
Tucker Carlson
I just wanted to get it on the record, that’s all I wanted.
I just wanted to get it on the record, that’s all I wanted.
Lex Fridman
I think it was a extremely… We have to acknowledge how important that interview was, for the record, and for opening the door for conversation. Opening the door to conversation literally is the path to more conversations in peace talks.
I think it was a extremely… We have to acknowledge how important that interview was, for the record, and for opening the door for conversation. Opening the door to conversation literally is the path to more conversations in peace talks.
Tucker Carlson
Well, I would flip it around and say anyone who seeks to shut that down by focusing on a supermarket video of four minutes versus a two hour and 15 minute long interview with a world leader, anyone who doesn’t want more conversation, who wants fewer facts, fewer perspectives is totalitarian, and probably doesn’t have good intent. I mean, I can honestly say for all my many manifold faults, I’ve never tried to make people shut up. It’s not in me, I don’t believe in that.
Well, I would flip it around and say anyone who seeks to shut that down by focusing on a supermarket video of four minutes versus a two hour and 15 minute long interview with a world leader, anyone who doesn’t want more conversation, who wants fewer facts, fewer perspectives is totalitarian, and probably doesn’t have good intent. I mean, I can honestly say for all my many manifold faults, I’ve never tried to make people shut up. It’s not in me, I don’t believe in that.
Lex Fridman
So Putin’s folks have shown interest for quite a while to speaking with me. So you’ve spoken with him, what advice would you give?
So Putin’s folks have shown interest for quite a while to speaking with me. So you’ve spoken with him, what advice would you give?
Tucker Carlson
Oh, do it immediately. How’s your Russian, by the way?
Oh, do it immediately. How’s your Russian, by the way?
Lex Fridman
Fluent.
Fluent.
Tucker Carlson
Have you kept up with it?
Have you kept up with it?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, fluent, so it would most likely be in Russian. So that’s the other thing is I do have a question about language barrier, was it annoying?
Yeah, fluent, so it would most likely be in Russian. So that’s the other thing is I do have a question about language barrier, was it annoying?
Tucker Carlson
It’s horrible. I mean, I don’t have much of a technique as an interviewer other than listen really carefully, that’s my only skill. I don’t have the best questions, I certainly don’t have the best questions. All I do that I’m proud of and that I think works is I just listen super carefully. I never let a word go by that I’m not paying… It exhausts me, actually. But you can’t do that in a foreign language because there’s a delay. And here, I’m just whining. But it’s real.
It’s horrible. I mean, I don’t have much of a technique as an interviewer other than listen really carefully, that’s my only skill. I don’t have the best questions, I certainly don’t have the best questions. All I do that I’m proud of and that I think works is I just listen super carefully. I never let a word go by that I’m not paying… It exhausts me, actually. But you can’t do that in a foreign language because there’s a delay. And here, I’m just whining. But it’s real.
Lex Fridman
It’s not whining. Can you actually describe the technical details of that? Are you hearing concurrently at the same time?
It’s not whining. Can you actually describe the technical details of that? Are you hearing concurrently at the same time?
Tucker Carlson
Yes, but there’s a massive lag. So what’s happening is… So the translators… So we were of course extremely uptight about the logistical details. So we brought our own cameraman who I’ve been around the world with, who worked at Fox, came with me now, amazing. And he did our cameras, lighting, everything, we had full control of that, and we had control of the tape. The Russians also had their own cameras, and I don’t know what they did with it. But we had full control of that, and we brought our own translator. We got our own translator, because I don’t trust anyone. So I think we had a good translator, we had two of them actually, because they get exhausted.
Yes, but there’s a massive lag. So what’s happening is… So the translators… So we were of course extremely uptight about the logistical details. So we brought our own cameraman who I’ve been around the world with, who worked at Fox, came with me now, amazing. And he did our cameras, lighting, everything, we had full control of that, and we had control of the tape. The Russians also had their own cameras, and I don’t know what they did with it. But we had full control of that, and we brought our own translator. We got our own translator, because I don’t trust anyone. So I think we had a good translator, we had two of them actually, because they get exhausted.
But the problem is, from my perspective, as someone who’s trying to think of a follow-up and listen to the answer, Putin will talk, and you can in part of your ear hear the Slavic sounds, and then over that is a guy with a Slavic accent speaking English. And then you can hear Putin stop talking, and then this guy’s answer goes on for another 15, 20 seconds. So it’s super disconcerting, and it’s really hard.
And the other thing is, it doesn’t matter how good your translators are. I’m interested in language, I speak only English fluently, but I’m really interested in language, and I work in language. It doesn’t matter how good your translator is, in literature and in conversation you miss so much if the language is moving… I mean, you see this in Bible study, you see it in Dostoevsky, you see it everywhere. If you don’t speak Aramaic, Hebrew, Russian, you’re not really getting… I mean, even in romance languages. I like Balzac, who obviously wrote in French. You read Père Goriot, it’s an amazing novel, hilarious, and you’re not really getting it. And it’s not that French and English are not that far apart. Russian, what?
Lex Fridman
Plus conversation. So the chemistry of conversation, the humor, the wit, the play with words, all this [inaudible 01:54:29].
Plus conversation. So the chemistry of conversation, the humor, the wit, the play with words, all this [inaudible 01:54:29].
Tucker Carlson
Exactly. And my understanding of Russian as a lover of Russian literature in English, is that it’s not a simple language at all. The grammar’s complex, there’s a lot that’s expressed that will be lost in the translation. So yes, I mean, the fact that you speak native Russian, I mean, I would run, not walk to that interview because I think it would just be amazing. You would get so much more out of it than I did.
Exactly. And my understanding of Russian as a lover of Russian literature in English, is that it’s not a simple language at all. The grammar’s complex, there’s a lot that’s expressed that will be lost in the translation. So yes, I mean, the fact that you speak native Russian, I mean, I would run, not walk to that interview because I think it would just be amazing. You would get so much more out of it than I did.
Lex Fridman
And we should say that you’ve met a lot of world leaders, both Zelenskyy and Putin are intelligent, witty, even funny. So there’s a depth to the person that could be explored through a conversation just on that element, the linguistic element.
And we should say that you’ve met a lot of world leaders, both Zelenskyy and Putin are intelligent, witty, even funny. So there’s a depth to the person that could be explored through a conversation just on that element, the linguistic element.
Tucker Carlson
For sure. And Putin speaks decent English, I spoke to him in English, so I know that, but he’s not comfortable with it at all. But Zelenskyy is, I think,
For sure. And Putin speaks decent English, I spoke to him in English, so I know that, but he’s not comfortable with it at all. But Zelenskyy is, I think,
Lex Fridman
No, he is… Well, he’s better than Putin at English, but the humor, the wit, the intelligence, all of that is not quite there in English. He says simple points, but the guy’s a comedian, and he’s a comedian primarily in Russian, the Russian language. So the Ukrainian language is now used mostly primarily as a kind of symbol of independence.
No, he is… Well, he’s better than Putin at English, but the humor, the wit, the intelligence, all of that is not quite there in English. He says simple points, but the guy’s a comedian, and he’s a comedian primarily in Russian, the Russian language. So the Ukrainian language is now used mostly primarily as a kind of symbol of independence.
Tucker Carlson
I’m aware of that, it’s a political decision. No, I know.
I’m aware of that, it’s a political decision. No, I know.
Lex Fridman
Really his native language is Russian language.
Really his native language is Russian language.
Tucker Carlson
Of course, as a lot of people in Ukraine.
Of course, as a lot of people in Ukraine.
Lex Fridman
But you can also understand his position, that he might not want to be speaking Russian publicly. That’s something I’ve…
But you can also understand his position, that he might not want to be speaking Russian publicly. That’s something I’ve…
Tucker Carlson
I don’t think they’re allowed to speak in Russian in some places in Ukraine. That’s one of the reasons that Russia was so mad, is that they were attacking language. And that’s a fair complaint, like, “What?” And by the way, if you haven’t been to Moscow in a while, you should see it, and you will pick up a million things that were invisible to me, and you should assess it for yourself. And my strong advice would be, even if you don’t interview Putin, go over there, spend a week there, and assess what you think. I mean, how restricted does the society feel? I mean, it would take a lot of balls to do this because… I mean, whatever you decide, you will be sucked into conversations that have nothing to do with you, political conversations. You’re obviously not a political activist, you’re an interviewer. But I think it would be so interesting.
I don’t think they’re allowed to speak in Russian in some places in Ukraine. That’s one of the reasons that Russia was so mad, is that they were attacking language. And that’s a fair complaint, like, “What?” And by the way, if you haven’t been to Moscow in a while, you should see it, and you will pick up a million things that were invisible to me, and you should assess it for yourself. And my strong advice would be, even if you don’t interview Putin, go over there, spend a week there, and assess what you think. I mean, how restricted does the society feel? I mean, it would take a lot of balls to do this because… I mean, whatever you decide, you will be sucked into conversations that have nothing to do with you, political conversations. You’re obviously not a political activist, you’re an interviewer. But I think it would be so interesting.
Lex Fridman
But for an interview itself, is there advice you have about how to carry an interview? It is fundamentally different when you do it in the native language.
But for an interview itself, is there advice you have about how to carry an interview? It is fundamentally different when you do it in the native language.
Tucker Carlson
Yes, I mean, I think I approached… And maybe I did it incorrectly, but this was the product of a lot of thought. I was coming into that interview aware that he hadn’t given an interview at all with anybody since the war started. So I had a million different questions, and as noted, I didn’t ask them because I just wanted to focus on the war. But I mean, there’s so many… I’ll send you my notes that I wrote, I was like a diligent little girl.
Yes, I mean, I think I approached… And maybe I did it incorrectly, but this was the product of a lot of thought. I was coming into that interview aware that he hadn’t given an interview at all with anybody since the war started. So I had a million different questions, and as noted, I didn’t ask them because I just wanted to focus on the war. But I mean, there’s so many… I’ll send you my notes that I wrote, I was like a diligent little girl.
Lex Fridman
That would be amazing, but I think…
That would be amazing, but I think…
Tucker Carlson
All these questions, and some of them I thought were pretty funny.
All these questions, and some of them I thought were pretty funny.
Lex Fridman
In your case, I think the very fact of the interview was the most important thing.
In your case, I think the very fact of the interview was the most important thing.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah, that’s probably right. The question that I really wanted to ask that I was almost going to ask, because it made me laugh out loud. I was sitting drinking coffee beforehand with my producers, and I was like, “I’m going to go in there. My first question is going to be, Mr. President, I’ve been here in the Kremlin for two days preparing, and I haven’t seen a single African-American in a position of power in the Kremlin.” I thought that’s too culturally specific and dry. And he’d be like, “This guy’s freaking crazy.”
Yeah, that’s probably right. The question that I really wanted to ask that I was almost going to ask, because it made me laugh out loud. I was sitting drinking coffee beforehand with my producers, and I was like, “I’m going to go in there. My first question is going to be, Mr. President, I’ve been here in the Kremlin for two days preparing, and I haven’t seen a single African-American in a position of power in the Kremlin.” I thought that’s too culturally specific and dry. And he’d be like, “This guy’s freaking crazy.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah, you don’t want to open with humor.
Yeah, you don’t want to open with humor.
Tucker Carlson
I know.
I know.
Lex Fridman
All right.
All right.
Tucker Carlson
Doesn’t translate.
Doesn’t translate.
Lex Fridman
It doesn’t. Oh, yeah, and there’ll be a small delay where you have to wait for the joke, to see if it lands or not.
It doesn’t. Oh, yeah, and there’ll be a small delay where you have to wait for the joke, to see if it lands or not.
Tucker Carlson
Like, “What? This is not America.”
Like, “What? This is not America.”
Nuclear war
Lex Fridman
At Fox, you were for a time the most popular host. After Fox you’ve garnered a huge amount of attention as well, same, probably more. Do you worry that popularity and just that attention gets to your head, is a kind of drug that clouds your thinking?
At Fox, you were for a time the most popular host. After Fox you’ve garnered a huge amount of attention as well, same, probably more. Do you worry that popularity and just that attention gets to your head, is a kind of drug that clouds your thinking?
Tucker Carlson
You think? I live in a spiritual graveyard of people killed by the quest for fame. Yes, I have lived in it. I mean, I would say the two advantages I have. One, I Have a happy family, and a stable family, and a stable group of friends, which is just the greatest blessing, and a strong love of nature that my family shares. So I’m in nature every day. And I have a whole series of rituals designed to keep me from becoming the asshole that I could easily become. But no, of course, I mean, that’s what I… And I don’t want to beat up on… I’m grateful to Elon who gave me a platform, and I mean that sincerely. But I definitely don’t spend a lot of time on social media or on the internet, for that exact reason. Well, first of all, I think it’s, as I’ve said, a much more controlled environment than we acknowledge, and I don’t want lies in my head. But I also don’t want to become the sort of person who’s seeking the adulation of strangers, I think that’s soul poison.
You think? I live in a spiritual graveyard of people killed by the quest for fame. Yes, I have lived in it. I mean, I would say the two advantages I have. One, I Have a happy family, and a stable family, and a stable group of friends, which is just the greatest blessing, and a strong love of nature that my family shares. So I’m in nature every day. And I have a whole series of rituals designed to keep me from becoming the asshole that I could easily become. But no, of course, I mean, that’s what I… And I don’t want to beat up on… I’m grateful to Elon who gave me a platform, and I mean that sincerely. But I definitely don’t spend a lot of time on social media or on the internet, for that exact reason. Well, first of all, I think it’s, as I’ve said, a much more controlled environment than we acknowledge, and I don’t want lies in my head. But I also don’t want to become the sort of person who’s seeking the adulation of strangers, I think that’s soul poison.
And I said earlier that I think that the desire for power and money will kill you, and I believe that, and I’ve seen it a lot. But I also think the desire for the love of people you don’t know is every bit as poisonous, maybe more so. And so, yes. And it’s not just because I’ve obviously spent most of my life in public. And in fact, I don’t spend my life in public, and I’m a completely private person. But professionally, I’ve spent my life in public. It’s not just that, it’s social media makes everybody into a cable news host. And we were talking off the air, my new… I’m obsessed with this. I don’t know enough about it, but here’s what I do know. South Korea, amazing country, great people. I grew up around Koreans, probably no group, if I can generalize about a group, that I like more than Koreans, are just smart, funny, honest, brave. I really like Koreans, I always have, my whole life, growing up in sunny California with Koreans.
South Korea is dying, it’s literally dying. It’s way below replacement rate in fertility, its suicide rate is astronomical. Why is that? It’s a rich country. Of course, I don’t know the answer. But I suspect it has something to do with the penetration of technology into South Korean society, is I think certainly one of the highest in the world, people live online there. And there was a belief for a bunch of reasons in South Korea that western technology would be a liberating progressive force, and I think it’s been the opposite. It’s my sense, strong sense. And I think it’s true in this country too. And I don’t understand how people can ignore the decline in life expectancy or the rise in fentanyl use. It’s not just about China shipping precursor chemicals to Mexico, it’s like, “Why would you take that shit?”
Lex Fridman
I hope those two things aren’t coupled, technological advancement and the erosion…
I hope those two things aren’t coupled, technological advancement and the erosion…
Tucker Carlson
Well, let me ask you… And I know you’re a technologist and I respect it, and there’s a lot about technology that I like and have benefited from. I had back surgery and it worked. Okay, so I’m not against all technology. But can you name a big technology in the last 20 years that we can say conclusively has improved people’s lives?
Well, let me ask you… And I know you’re a technologist and I respect it, and there’s a lot about technology that I like and have benefited from. I had back surgery and it worked. Okay, so I’m not against all technology. But can you name a big technology in the last 20 years that we can say conclusively has improved people’s lives?
Lex Fridman
Well, conclusive is a tough thing.
Well, conclusive is a tough thing.
Tucker Carlson
Pretty conclusively, that we can brag about.
Pretty conclusively, that we can brag about.
Lex Fridman
Well, you’ve criticized Google search recently, but I think making the world knowledge accessible to anyone anywhere across the world through Google search.
Well, you’ve criticized Google search recently, but I think making the world knowledge accessible to anyone anywhere across the world through Google search.
Tucker Carlson
Well, I love that, I love that idea. Are people better informed or are they more superstitious and misled than they were 20 years ago? It’s not close.
Well, I love that, I love that idea. Are people better informed or are they more superstitious and misled than they were 20 years ago? It’s not close.
Lex Fridman
Well, no, I don’t know, I think they are more informed. It’s just revealing the ignorance. The internet has revealed ignorance that people have, but I think the ignorance has been decreasing gradually. And if you look, you can criticize places like Wikipedia a lot, and very many aspects of Wikipedia are very biased. But most of it are actually topics that don’t have any bias in them, because they’re not political or so on, there’s no battle over those topics. And most of Wikipedia is the fastest way to learn about a thing.
Well, no, I don’t know, I think they are more informed. It’s just revealing the ignorance. The internet has revealed ignorance that people have, but I think the ignorance has been decreasing gradually. And if you look, you can criticize places like Wikipedia a lot, and very many aspects of Wikipedia are very biased. But most of it are actually topics that don’t have any bias in them, because they’re not political or so on, there’s no battle over those topics. And most of Wikipedia is the fastest way to learn about a thing.
Tucker Carlson
I couldn’t agree more. You can very quickly imagine… You’re an expert, and that may be the problem, I think. No, I just experienced it in Moscow. Again, I feel like I’m in the top 1% for information, certainly intake, because it’s my job. And I had literally… And I’m always out of the country, I’ve been around the world many times. I feel like I know a lot about the rest of the world, or I thought I did. And how did I not know any of that? And maybe I’m just unusually ignorant or something, or reading the wrong things. I don’t know what it was, but all I know is the digital information sources that I use to understand just something as simple as, what’s the city of Moscow like? Were completely inadequate. And anyway, look, I just am worried that we’re missing the obvious signs. And the obvious signs are reproduction, life expectancy, sobriety. If you have a society where people just can’t deal with being sober, don’t want to have children, and are dying younger, you have a suicidal society.
I couldn’t agree more. You can very quickly imagine… You’re an expert, and that may be the problem, I think. No, I just experienced it in Moscow. Again, I feel like I’m in the top 1% for information, certainly intake, because it’s my job. And I had literally… And I’m always out of the country, I’ve been around the world many times. I feel like I know a lot about the rest of the world, or I thought I did. And how did I not know any of that? And maybe I’m just unusually ignorant or something, or reading the wrong things. I don’t know what it was, but all I know is the digital information sources that I use to understand just something as simple as, what’s the city of Moscow like? Were completely inadequate. And anyway, look, I just am worried that we’re missing the obvious signs. And the obvious signs are reproduction, life expectancy, sobriety. If you have a society where people just can’t deal with being sober, don’t want to have children, and are dying younger, you have a suicidal society.
Tucker Carlson
…An extremely sick, you have a suicidal society. And I’m not even blaming anyone for it. I’m just saying objectively that is true. And the measure of a health of your society is the number of children that you have and how well they do. It’s super simple. That’s the next generation. We all die and what replaces us? And if you don’t care, then you’re suicidal. And maybe other things too. But that’s all I’m saying. So what happened to South Korea? Why can’t anyone answer the question? They’re great people, they’re rich, they have all these advantages. They’re on the cutting edge of every American… For a foreign country, they’re more American than maybe any other country other than Canada. And what happened?
…An extremely sick, you have a suicidal society. And I’m not even blaming anyone for it. I’m just saying objectively that is true. And the measure of a health of your society is the number of children that you have and how well they do. It’s super simple. That’s the next generation. We all die and what replaces us? And if you don’t care, then you’re suicidal. And maybe other things too. But that’s all I’m saying. So what happened to South Korea? Why can’t anyone answer the question? They’re great people, they’re rich, they have all these advantages. They’re on the cutting edge of every American… For a foreign country, they’re more American than maybe any other country other than Canada. And what happened?
Lex Fridman
And I mean, your fundamental worry is the same kind of thing might be happening or will happen in the United States.
And I mean, your fundamental worry is the same kind of thing might be happening or will happen in the United States.
Tucker Carlson
Well, let me just ask you this. I think North Korea seems like the most dystopian, horrible place in the world, right? Obviously it’s a byword for dystopia, right? North Korean. I use it all the time. And I mean it. If in a hundred years there are more North Koreans still alive than there are South Koreans, what does that tell us?
Well, let me just ask you this. I think North Korea seems like the most dystopian, horrible place in the world, right? Obviously it’s a byword for dystopia, right? North Korean. I use it all the time. And I mean it. If in a hundred years there are more North Koreans still alive than there are South Koreans, what does that tell us?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, that’s something to worry about. But also-
Yeah, that’s something to worry about. But also-
Tucker Carlson
But how did it happen? But why? I’m interested in the why. This is a question I asked Putin. Sometimes we don’t know why, but why does no one ask why?
But how did it happen? But why? I’m interested in the why. This is a question I asked Putin. Sometimes we don’t know why, but why does no one ask why?
Lex Fridman
I’ve seen a lot of increased distrust in science, which is deserved in many places. It just worries me because some of the greatest inventions of humanity come from science and technological innovation.
I’ve seen a lot of increased distrust in science, which is deserved in many places. It just worries me because some of the greatest inventions of humanity come from science and technological innovation.
Tucker Carlson
Okay, then let me ask you a couple quick questions and perhaps you have the answer. I’ve always assumed that was true. And I should say that when I was a kid, I lived in La Jolla, California, next to the Salk Institute named after Jonas Salk, a resident of La Jolla, California, who created the polio vaccine and saved untold millions. And so my belief, which is still my belief, actually, that’s a great thing. It’s one of the great additions to human flourishing ever. But if technology is so great, why is life expectancy going down? And why are fewer people having kids? And why would anybody who has internet access ever use fentanyl? What is that? What is going on? And until we can answer that question, I think we have to assume the question of whether technology is a net good or a net bad is unresolved at best. Right?
Okay, then let me ask you a couple quick questions and perhaps you have the answer. I’ve always assumed that was true. And I should say that when I was a kid, I lived in La Jolla, California, next to the Salk Institute named after Jonas Salk, a resident of La Jolla, California, who created the polio vaccine and saved untold millions. And so my belief, which is still my belief, actually, that’s a great thing. It’s one of the great additions to human flourishing ever. But if technology is so great, why is life expectancy going down? And why are fewer people having kids? And why would anybody who has internet access ever use fentanyl? What is that? What is going on? And until we can answer that question, I think we have to assume the question of whether technology is a net good or a net bad is unresolved at best. Right?
Lex Fridman
At best, perhaps. But technology is the very tool which will allow us to have that kind of discourse to figure out to do science better.
At best, perhaps. But technology is the very tool which will allow us to have that kind of discourse to figure out to do science better.
Tucker Carlson
I mean, I want that to be true. And when you said that the internet allows people to escape the darkness of ignorance, man, that resonated with me because I felt that way in 1993, 4 when it was first starting, and I first got on it and I thought, man, this is amazing. You can talk for free to anyone around the world. This is going to be great. But let me just ask you this. This is something I’ve never gotten over or gotten a straight answer to. Why is it that in any European city, the greatest buildings indisputably were built before electricity and the machine age? Why has no one ever built a medieval cathedral in the modern era ever?
I mean, I want that to be true. And when you said that the internet allows people to escape the darkness of ignorance, man, that resonated with me because I felt that way in 1993, 4 when it was first starting, and I first got on it and I thought, man, this is amazing. You can talk for free to anyone around the world. This is going to be great. But let me just ask you this. This is something I’ve never gotten over or gotten a straight answer to. Why is it that in any European city, the greatest buildings indisputably were built before electricity and the machine age? Why has no one ever built a medieval cathedral in the modern era ever?
Lex Fridman
Well-
Well-
Tucker Carlson
What is that?
What is that?
Lex Fridman
…Indisputably? You have a presumption. We have a good definition wat beauty is. There’s a lot of people-
…Indisputably? You have a presumption. We have a good definition wat beauty is. There’s a lot of people-
Tucker Carlson
Right. Let’s be specific. Pick a European city or any city in the world and tell me that there’s a prettier building than say Notre Dame before it was set fire to.
Right. Let’s be specific. Pick a European city or any city in the world and tell me that there’s a prettier building than say Notre Dame before it was set fire to.
Lex Fridman
There’s other sources of prettiness and beauty.
There’s other sources of prettiness and beauty.
Tucker Carlson
Purely in architecture. Of course. Trees are prettier than any building in my opinion. So I agree with you there.
Purely in architecture. Of course. Trees are prettier than any building in my opinion. So I agree with you there.
Lex Fridman
Well, but also there could be, I grew up in the pre-internet age, but-
Well, but also there could be, I grew up in the pre-internet age, but-
Tucker Carlson
Good.
Good.
Lex Fridman
Good. But if you grew up in the internet age, I think your eyes would be more open to beauty that’s digital. That is in a digital-
Good. But if you grew up in the internet age, I think your eyes would be more open to beauty that’s digital. That is in a digital-
Tucker Carlson
I’m not discounting the possibility of digital beauty at all. And the Ted Kaczynski in me wants to, but that’s too close-minded. I agree. I’m completely willing to believe there is such a thing as digital beauty. I mean, I have digital pictures of my phone, of my dogs and kids. So I know that there is, but purely in the realm of architecture because it’s limited, and it is one of the pure expressions of human creativity. We need places to live and work and worship and eat. And so we build buildings and every civilization has, but the machine age, the industrial age seemed to have decreased the quality and the beauty in that one expression of human creativity, architecture. And why is that?
I’m not discounting the possibility of digital beauty at all. And the Ted Kaczynski in me wants to, but that’s too close-minded. I agree. I’m completely willing to believe there is such a thing as digital beauty. I mean, I have digital pictures of my phone, of my dogs and kids. So I know that there is, but purely in the realm of architecture because it’s limited, and it is one of the pure expressions of human creativity. We need places to live and work and worship and eat. And so we build buildings and every civilization has, but the machine age, the industrial age seemed to have decreased the quality and the beauty in that one expression of human creativity, architecture. And why is that?
Lex Fridman
Well, I could also argue that I’m a big sucker for bridges and modern bridges can give older bridges a run for their money.
Well, I could also argue that I’m a big sucker for bridges and modern bridges can give older bridges a run for their money.
Tucker Carlson
I like bridges too. So I agree with you, sort of. But the Brooklyn Bridge… I don’t know that there’s any modern bridges that was built in late-
I like bridges too. So I agree with you, sort of. But the Brooklyn Bridge… I don’t know that there’s any modern bridges that was built in late-
Lex Fridman
19th century.
19th century.
Tucker Carlson
…19th century. Very much in the industrial age. But I’m just saying the great cathedrals of Europe-
…19th century. Very much in the industrial age. But I’m just saying the great cathedrals of Europe-
Lex Fridman
Sure, yeah.
Sure, yeah.
Tucker Carlson
Even the pyramids, whoever built them. It seems like it’s super obvious. I’m dealing on the autism level here, just like, well, why is that? But that’s a good way to start. If all of a sudden you have electricity and hydraulics and you have access to… I mean, I have machines in my wood shop at home that are so much more advanced than anything. Any cathedral builder in 15th century Europe had. And yet there’s neither I nor anyone I know could even begin to understand how a flying buttress was built. And so what is that?
Even the pyramids, whoever built them. It seems like it’s super obvious. I’m dealing on the autism level here, just like, well, why is that? But that’s a good way to start. If all of a sudden you have electricity and hydraulics and you have access to… I mean, I have machines in my wood shop at home that are so much more advanced than anything. Any cathedral builder in 15th century Europe had. And yet there’s neither I nor anyone I know could even begin to understand how a flying buttress was built. And so what is that?
Lex Fridman
And the other question is also consider that whatever is creating this technology is unstoppable.
And the other question is also consider that whatever is creating this technology is unstoppable.
Tucker Carlson
Well, there’s that.
Well, there’s that.
Lex Fridman
And the question is how do you steer it then? You have to look in a realist way at the world and say that if you don’t, somebody else will. And you want to do it in a safe way. I mean, this is the Manhattan Project.
And the question is how do you steer it then? You have to look in a realist way at the world and say that if you don’t, somebody else will. And you want to do it in a safe way. I mean, this is the Manhattan Project.
Tucker Carlson
Was the Manhattan Project a good idea, to create nuclear weapons? That’s an easy call. No.
Was the Manhattan Project a good idea, to create nuclear weapons? That’s an easy call. No.
Lex Fridman
For me, it’s an easy call in retrospect. In retrospect, yes. Because it seems like it stopped world wars. So the mutually assured destruction seems to have ended wars. Ended major military conflict.
For me, it’s an easy call in retrospect. In retrospect, yes. Because it seems like it stopped world wars. So the mutually assured destruction seems to have ended wars. Ended major military conflict.
Tucker Carlson
Well it’s been what, 80 years? Not even 80 years, 79. And so we haven’t had a world war in 79 years. But one nuclear exchange would of course kill more people than all wars in human history combined.
Well it’s been what, 80 years? Not even 80 years, 79. And so we haven’t had a world war in 79 years. But one nuclear exchange would of course kill more people than all wars in human history combined.
Lex Fridman
Your saying 79 makes it sound like you’re counting.
Your saying 79 makes it sound like you’re counting.
Tucker Carlson
I am counting. Because I think it obviously, it’s completely demonic and everyone pretends like it’s great. Nuclear weapons are evil.
I am counting. Because I think it obviously, it’s completely demonic and everyone pretends like it’s great. Nuclear weapons are evil.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, no, absolutely.
Yeah, no, absolutely.
Tucker Carlson
The use of them is evil, and the technology itself is evil. And in my opinion, I mean, it’s like if you can’t, that’s just so obvious. And what I’m saying is I’m not against all technology. I took a shower this morning. It was powered by an electric pump, heated by a water heater. I loved it. I sat in an electric sauna. I’m not against all technology, obviously, but the mindless worship of technology?
The use of them is evil, and the technology itself is evil. And in my opinion, I mean, it’s like if you can’t, that’s just so obvious. And what I’m saying is I’m not against all technology. I took a shower this morning. It was powered by an electric pump, heated by a water heater. I loved it. I sat in an electric sauna. I’m not against all technology, obviously, but the mindless worship of technology?
Lex Fridman
Mindless worship of anything is pretty bad.
Mindless worship of anything is pretty bad.
Tucker Carlson
But I’m just saying, so you said, let’s approach this from a realist perspective. Okay, let’s. If we think that there is a reasonable or even a potential chance it could happen, maybe on the margins, let’s assign it a 15% chance, that AI, for example, gets away from us, and we are now ruled by machines that may actually hate us. Who knows what they want. Why wouldn’t we use force to stop that from happening? So you’re walking down the street in midtown Manhattan, it’s midnight. You’ve had a few drinks, you’re coming from dinner, you’re walking back to your apartment. A guy, a very thuggish looking guy, young man, approaches you. He’s 50 feet away. He pulls out a handgun, he lifts it up to you. You also are armed.
But I’m just saying, so you said, let’s approach this from a realist perspective. Okay, let’s. If we think that there is a reasonable or even a potential chance it could happen, maybe on the margins, let’s assign it a 15% chance, that AI, for example, gets away from us, and we are now ruled by machines that may actually hate us. Who knows what they want. Why wouldn’t we use force to stop that from happening? So you’re walking down the street in midtown Manhattan, it’s midnight. You’ve had a few drinks, you’re coming from dinner, you’re walking back to your apartment. A guy, a very thuggish looking guy, young man, approaches you. He’s 50 feet away. He pulls out a handgun, he lifts it up to you. You also are armed.
Do you shoot him or do you wait to get shot? Because all the data, look, he hasn’t shot you. He’s not committed a crime other than carrying a weapon in New York City. But maybe he’s got a license. You don’t know. It could be legal, but he’s pointing a gun at you. Is it fair to kill him before he kills you, even though you can’t prove that he will kill you?
Lex Fridman
If I knew my skills with a gun because he already has the gun out.
If I knew my skills with a gun because he already has the gun out.
Tucker Carlson
Right, but it turns out that you have some confidence in your ability to stop the threat by force. Are you justified in doing that?
Right, but it turns out that you have some confidence in your ability to stop the threat by force. Are you justified in doing that?
Lex Fridman
I just like this picture. Am I wearing a cowboy hat? No.
I just like this picture. Am I wearing a cowboy hat? No.
Tucker Carlson
No. But you are wearing cowboy boots and they’re clicking on the cobblestones. Actually, you’re in the meat packing.
No. But you are wearing cowboy boots and they’re clicking on the cobblestones. Actually, you’re in the meat packing.
Lex Fridman
Okay, great. I like this picture. I’m just, I think about this a lot, no. Yeah, I understand your point. But also I think that metaphor falls apart if there’s other nations at play here. Same as with the nuclear bomb. If US doesn’t build it, will other nations build it? The Soviet Union build it. China or Nazi Germany.
Okay, great. I like this picture. I’m just, I think about this a lot, no. Yeah, I understand your point. But also I think that metaphor falls apart if there’s other nations at play here. Same as with the nuclear bomb. If US doesn’t build it, will other nations build it? The Soviet Union build it. China or Nazi Germany.
Tucker Carlson
We faced this. I mean, we faced this and the last president to try and keep in a meaningful way nuclear proliferation under control was John F. Kennedy. And look what happened to him.
We faced this. I mean, we faced this and the last president to try and keep in a meaningful way nuclear proliferation under control was John F. Kennedy. And look what happened to him.
Lex Fridman
But what’s your suggestion? Was it inevitable?
But what’s your suggestion? Was it inevitable?
Tucker Carlson
Well, hold on. Well, their position in 1962 was no, it’s absolutely not inevitable. Or perhaps it’s inevitable in the sense that our death is inevitable as human beings, but we fight against the dying of the light anyway, because that’s the right thing to do. No, we were willing to use force to prevent other countries from getting the bomb because we thought that would be really terrible. We acknowledged that while there were upsides to nuclear weapons, just like there are upsides to AI, the downside was terrifying in the hands of… I mean, that’s the thing that I kind of don’t get. It’s like the applications of that technology in the hands of people who mean to do harm and destroy. It’s so obviously terrifying.
Well, hold on. Well, their position in 1962 was no, it’s absolutely not inevitable. Or perhaps it’s inevitable in the sense that our death is inevitable as human beings, but we fight against the dying of the light anyway, because that’s the right thing to do. No, we were willing to use force to prevent other countries from getting the bomb because we thought that would be really terrible. We acknowledged that while there were upsides to nuclear weapons, just like there are upsides to AI, the downside was terrifying in the hands of… I mean, that’s the thing that I kind of don’t get. It’s like the applications of that technology in the hands of people who mean to do harm and destroy. It’s so obviously terrifying.
Lex Fridman
It’s not so obvious to me. What I’m terrified about is probably similar thing that you’re terrified about, is using that technology to manipulate people’s minds. That’s much more reasonable to me as an expectation, a real threat that’s possible in the next few years.
It’s not so obvious to me. What I’m terrified about is probably similar thing that you’re terrified about, is using that technology to manipulate people’s minds. That’s much more reasonable to me as an expectation, a real threat that’s possible in the next few years.
Tucker Carlson
But what matters more than that?
But what matters more than that?
Lex Fridman
Well, I think that could lead to destruction of human civilization through other humans, for example, starting nuclear wars.
Well, I think that could lead to destruction of human civilization through other humans, for example, starting nuclear wars.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah. Well, I mean, this is one of the reasons I wasn’t afraid in the Vladimir Putin interview. It’s all ending anyway. You know what I mean?
Yeah. Well, I mean, this is one of the reasons I wasn’t afraid in the Vladimir Putin interview. It’s all ending anyway. You know what I mean?
Lex Fridman
Yeah. Well-
Yeah. Well-
Tucker Carlson
Might as well dance on the deck of the Titanic. Don’t be a pussy. Enjoy it.
Might as well dance on the deck of the Titanic. Don’t be a pussy. Enjoy it.
Lex Fridman
I think we will forever fight against the dying of the light as the entirety of the civilization.
I think we will forever fight against the dying of the light as the entirety of the civilization.
Tucker Carlson
Someone the other day said that Biden ascribed that to Churchill. That was a Churchill quote. That’s kind of what I’m saying. It’s like if you live in a society where people don’t read anymore, people are by definition much more ignorant, but they don’t know it. I do think the Wikipedia culture, and I think there are cool things about Wikipedia, certainly its ease of use is high and that’s great, but people get the sense that like, oh, I know a lot about this or that or the other thing. And it’s like the key to wisdom, again, the key to wise decision making is doing what you don’t know. And it’s just so important to be reminded of what a dummy you are and how ignorant you are all the time. That’s why I like having daughters. It’s like it’s never far from mind how flawed I am. And that’s important.
Someone the other day said that Biden ascribed that to Churchill. That was a Churchill quote. That’s kind of what I’m saying. It’s like if you live in a society where people don’t read anymore, people are by definition much more ignorant, but they don’t know it. I do think the Wikipedia culture, and I think there are cool things about Wikipedia, certainly its ease of use is high and that’s great, but people get the sense that like, oh, I know a lot about this or that or the other thing. And it’s like the key to wisdom, again, the key to wise decision making is doing what you don’t know. And it’s just so important to be reminded of what a dummy you are and how ignorant you are all the time. That’s why I like having daughters. It’s like it’s never far from mind how flawed I am. And that’s important.
Lex Fridman
In the same way I hope to be a dad one day.
In the same way I hope to be a dad one day.
Tucker Carlson
You should have a ton of kids. Are you going to have a ton of pups?
You should have a ton of kids. Are you going to have a ton of pups?
Lex Fridman
Five… Oh pup, you mean kids?
Five… Oh pup, you mean kids?
Tucker Carlson
Children.
Children.
Lex Fridman
Yes. But also I’ve been thinking of getting a dog, but unrelated. I would love to have five or six kids. Yeah, for sure.
Yes. But also I’ve been thinking of getting a dog, but unrelated. I would love to have five or six kids. Yeah, for sure.
Tucker Carlson
Have you found a victim yet?
Have you found a victim yet?
Lex Fridman
You make it sound so romantic, Tucker.
You make it sound so romantic, Tucker.
Tucker Carlson
I’m just joking. I love it. No, you should totally do that.
I’m just joking. I love it. No, you should totally do that.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, 100%. But also in terms of being humble, I do jiu-jitsu. It’s a martial art where you get your ass kicked all the time.
Yeah, 100%. But also in terms of being humble, I do jiu-jitsu. It’s a martial art where you get your ass kicked all the time.
Tucker Carlson
I love that.
I love that.
Lex Fridman
It’s nice to get your ass kicked. Physical humbling is unlike anything else, I think, because we’re kind of monkeys at heart and just getting your ass kicked just really helpful.
It’s nice to get your ass kicked. Physical humbling is unlike anything else, I think, because we’re kind of monkeys at heart and just getting your ass kicked just really helpful.
Tucker Carlson
I agree. I’ve had it happen to me twice.
I agree. I’ve had it happen to me twice.
Lex Fridman
Twice is enough.
Twice is enough.
Tucker Carlson
It got me to quit drinking. I was good at starting fights. Not good at winning them, but no, I completely agree with that.
It got me to quit drinking. I was good at starting fights. Not good at winning them, but no, I completely agree with that.
Trump
Lex Fridman
Let me ask you, you’ve been pretty close with Donald Trump. Your private texts about him around the 2020 election were made public in one of them. You said you passionately hate Trump. When that came out, you said that you actually no, you love him. So how do you explain the difference?
Let me ask you, you’ve been pretty close with Donald Trump. Your private texts about him around the 2020 election were made public in one of them. You said you passionately hate Trump. When that came out, you said that you actually no, you love him. So how do you explain the difference?
Tucker Carlson
My texts reflect a lot of things, including how I feel at the moment that I sent them. That specific text I happen to know since I had to go through it forensically during my deposition in a case I was not named in. I had nothing to do with whatsoever. It’s crazy how civil suits can be used to hurt people you disagree with politically. But I was mad at a very specific person. I mean, really I, you’re asking me, I’ll tell you exactly what that was. It was the second the election ended and they stopped voting, stopped the vote counting on election night. I was like, well, this is, and it’s all now mail-in ballots and electronic voting machines. I was like, that’s a rigged election. I thought that then, I think now. Now it’s obvious that it was. But at the time I was like, “I feel like that was crazy what just happened”.
My texts reflect a lot of things, including how I feel at the moment that I sent them. That specific text I happen to know since I had to go through it forensically during my deposition in a case I was not named in. I had nothing to do with whatsoever. It’s crazy how civil suits can be used to hurt people you disagree with politically. But I was mad at a very specific person. I mean, really I, you’re asking me, I’ll tell you exactly what that was. It was the second the election ended and they stopped voting, stopped the vote counting on election night. I was like, well, this is, and it’s all now mail-in ballots and electronic voting machines. I was like, that’s a rigged election. I thought that then, I think now. Now it’s obvious that it was. But at the time I was like, “I feel like that was crazy what just happened”.
I want, but I don’t want to go on TV and say that’s a rigged election because I don’t have any evidence it’s a rigged election. You can’t do that. It’s irresponsible and it’s wrong. So I was like, the Trump campaign was making all these claims about this or that fraud. So I was trying my best to substantiate them, to follow up on it. Everyone was like, “Shut up, Trump, you lost. Go away. We’re going to indict you.” But I felt like my job was to be like, no, the guy’s, he’s president, he’s claiming the election just got stolen and he’s making these claims. Let’s see if we can… Well, the people around him were so incompetent. It was just absolutely crazy. And so I called a couple of times, I finally give up, but I’d call and be like, “All right, you guys claim that these inconsistencies and this whatever, this happened, give me evidence and I’ll put it on TV.” It’s my job to bring stuff that is not going to be aired anywhere else to the public. It was insane how incompetent and unserious-
Lex Fridman
So they weren’t able to provide like-
So they weren’t able to provide like-
Tucker Carlson
Here’s the point of the story and of that text. So then they come out and they say, well, dead people voted. Well, that’s just an easy call. If a dead person voted, we can prove someone’s dead. Because being dead is one of the few things we’re good at verifying because you start to smell and there’s a record of it. It’s called the death certificate. So it was like, give me the names of people who are dead who voted, and then we can get their registration and we can show they voted. Five names. So I go on TV and I say this Caroline Johnson, 79 of Waukegan, Illinois voted. Here’s her death certificate. She died. And the campaign sends me this stuff. Now in general, I don’t take stuff directly from campaigns.
Here’s the point of the story and of that text. So then they come out and they say, well, dead people voted. Well, that’s just an easy call. If a dead person voted, we can prove someone’s dead. Because being dead is one of the few things we’re good at verifying because you start to smell and there’s a record of it. It’s called the death certificate. So it was like, give me the names of people who are dead who voted, and then we can get their registration and we can show they voted. Five names. So I go on TV and I say this Caroline Johnson, 79 of Waukegan, Illinois voted. Here’s her death certificate. She died. And the campaign sends me this stuff. Now in general, I don’t take stuff directly from campaigns.
Because they all lie, because their job is to get elected or whatever. So I’m very wary of campaigns having been around it for 30 years, but I made an exception to my rule and I got a bunch of stuff from them. Well, of the six names, two of them are still alive. What? I immediately corrected it the next night. CNN did a whole segment on how I was spreading disinformation, which I was by the way. In this one case, they were right. I was so mad. I was like, “I hate you. I’m not talking about you. I’m so mad.” Anyway, that’s the answer. That’s what that was.
Lex Fridman
Who were you texting to?
Who were you texting to?
Tucker Carlson
My producer and I was venting. It’s like a producer I was really close to, and I’ve known him for a long time. He’s really smart. And he’s like, he was someone I could be honest with. And I was like, and by the way, it was so funny. I mean now I’m doing what was me, which I will keep to a minimum, but it’s like stealing someone’s texts? And by the way, I was an idiot. I should have said, “Come and arrest me. I’m not giving you my freaking text messages.”
My producer and I was venting. It’s like a producer I was really close to, and I’ve known him for a long time. He’s really smart. And he’s like, he was someone I could be honest with. And I was like, and by the way, it was so funny. I mean now I’m doing what was me, which I will keep to a minimum, but it’s like stealing someone’s texts? And by the way, I was an idiot. I should have said, “Come and arrest me. I’m not giving you my freaking text messages.”
But I got bullied into it by a lawyer… I didn’t get bullied into it. I was weak enough to agree with a lawyer. It was my fault. Never should have done that. “Fuck you. They’re my texts.” I’m not even named in this case. That’s what I should have said, but I didn’t. I said I was mad on the air the next day, but not in language that colorful, but whatever. I try to be transparent. I mean, I also think, by the way, if you watch someone over time, you don’t always know what they really think, but you can tell if someone’s lying. You can sort of feel it in people. And I have lied. I’m sure I’ll lie again. I don’t want to lie. I don’t think I’m a liar. I try not to be a liar. I don’t want to be a liar. I think it’s really important not to be a liar.
Lex Fridman
You said nice things about me earlier. I’m starting to question. I have questions. I have a lot of questions, Tucker.
You said nice things about me earlier. I’m starting to question. I have questions. I have a lot of questions, Tucker.
Tucker Carlson
I hate Lex Fridman.
I hate Lex Fridman.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I’m going to have to see your texts after this.
Yeah. I’m going to have to see your texts after this.
Tucker Carlson
My texts are so uninteresting now. It’s like crazy how uninteresting they are.
My texts are so uninteresting now. It’s like crazy how uninteresting they are.
Lex Fridman
Emojis and gifs.
Emojis and gifs.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah, lots of dog pictures.
Yeah, lots of dog pictures.
Lex Fridman
Nice. You said some degree the election was rigged. Was it stolen?
Nice. You said some degree the election was rigged. Was it stolen?
Tucker Carlson
It was a hundred percent stolen. Are you joking?
It was a hundred percent stolen. Are you joking?
Lex Fridman
It was rigged to that large of a degree?
It was rigged to that large of a degree?
Tucker Carlson
Yeah. They completely change the way people vote right before the election on the basis of COVID, which had nothing to do with-
Yeah. They completely change the way people vote right before the election on the basis of COVID, which had nothing to do with-
Lex Fridman
So in that way it was rigged, meaning manipulated.
So in that way it was rigged, meaning manipulated.
Tucker Carlson
One hundred percent. Then you censor the information people are allowed to get, anyone who complains about COVID… Which is like, by the way, it might’ve hurt Trump. But I mean it’s like whatever. I mean you could play it many different ways. You can’t have censorship in a democracy by definition. Here’s how it works. The people rule. They vote for representatives to carry their agenda to the capitol city and get it enacted. That’s how they’re in charge. And then every few years they get to reassess the performance of those people in an election. In order to do that, they need access, unfettered access to information. And no one, particularly not people who are already in power, is allowed to tell them what information they can have.
One hundred percent. Then you censor the information people are allowed to get, anyone who complains about COVID… Which is like, by the way, it might’ve hurt Trump. But I mean it’s like whatever. I mean you could play it many different ways. You can’t have censorship in a democracy by definition. Here’s how it works. The people rule. They vote for representatives to carry their agenda to the capitol city and get it enacted. That’s how they’re in charge. And then every few years they get to reassess the performance of those people in an election. In order to do that, they need access, unfettered access to information. And no one, particularly not people who are already in power, is allowed to tell them what information they can have.
They have to have all information that they want, whether the people in charge want it or don’t want it or think it’s true or think it’s false, it doesn’t matter. And the second you don’t have that, you don’t have a democracy. It’s not a free election, period. And that’s very clear in other countries, I guess. But it’s not clear here. But I would say it’s this election that… It took me a while to come to this, but it’s this election that’s the referendum on democracy. Biden is senile. He’s literally senile. He can’t talk, he can’t walk. The whole world knows that, leave our borders. Everybody in the world knows it.
A senile man is not going to get elected in the most powerful country in the world unless there’s fraud, period. Who would vote for a senile man? He literally can’t talk. And nobody I’ve ever met thinks he’s running the US government because he’s not. And so I think the world is looking on at this coming election and saying… And a lot of the world hates Trump. Okay, it’s not an endorsement of Trump, but it’s just true. If Joe Biden gets reelected, democracy is a freaking joke. That’s just true.
Lex Fridman
I think half the country doesn’t think he’s senile, just thinks-
I think half the country doesn’t think he’s senile, just thinks-
Tucker Carlson
Do you really think that?
Do you really think that?
Lex Fridman
…He’s speaking-
…He’s speaking-
Tucker Carlson
They don’t think he’s senile?
They don’t think he’s senile?
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I think he just has difficulty speaking. It’s like-
Yeah, I think he just has difficulty speaking. It’s like-
Tucker Carlson
Why do they think he has difficulty speaking?
Why do they think he has difficulty speaking?
Lex Fridman
…Gradual degradation. Just getting old. So cognitive ability is degrading.
…Gradual degradation. Just getting old. So cognitive ability is degrading.
Tucker Carlson
What’s the difference between degraded cognitive ability and senility?
What’s the difference between degraded cognitive ability and senility?
Lex Fridman
Well, senility has a threshold of is beyond a threshold to where he could be a functioning leader.
Well, senility has a threshold of is beyond a threshold to where he could be a functioning leader.
Tucker Carlson
That may be a term of art that I don’t fully understand and maybe there’s an IQ threshold or something, but I’m happy to go with degraded cognitive ability.
That may be a term of art that I don’t fully understand and maybe there’s an IQ threshold or something, but I’m happy to go with degraded cognitive ability.
Lex Fridman
Sure. But that’s an age thing.
Sure. But that’s an age thing.
Tucker Carlson
But he’s the leader of the United States with the world’s second-largest nuclear arsenal.
But he’s the leader of the United States with the world’s second-largest nuclear arsenal.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I’m with you. I’m a sucker for great speeches and for speaking abilities of leaders. And Biden with two wars going on and potentially more, the importance of a leader to speak eloquently, both privately in a room with other leaders and publicly is really important.
Yeah, I’m with you. I’m a sucker for great speeches and for speaking abilities of leaders. And Biden with two wars going on and potentially more, the importance of a leader to speak eloquently, both privately in a room with other leaders and publicly is really important.
Tucker Carlson
I agree with you that rhetorical ability really matters. Convincing people that your program is right, telling them what we’re for, national identity, national unity, all come from words. I agree with all of that. But at this stage, even someone who grunted at the microphone would be more reassuring than a guy who clearly doesn’t know where he is. And I think everyone knows that. And I can’t imagine there’s an honest person in Washington, which is going to vote for Biden by 90% obviously because they’re all dependent on the federal government for their income. But is there any person who could say, out of 350 million Americans that’s the most qualified to lead, or even in the top 80%, like what? That’s so embarrassing that that guy is our president. And with wars going on, it’s scary.
I agree with you that rhetorical ability really matters. Convincing people that your program is right, telling them what we’re for, national identity, national unity, all come from words. I agree with all of that. But at this stage, even someone who grunted at the microphone would be more reassuring than a guy who clearly doesn’t know where he is. And I think everyone knows that. And I can’t imagine there’s an honest person in Washington, which is going to vote for Biden by 90% obviously because they’re all dependent on the federal government for their income. But is there any person who could say, out of 350 million Americans that’s the most qualified to lead, or even in the top 80%, like what? That’s so embarrassing that that guy is our president. And with wars going on, it’s scary.
Lex Fridman
But it’s complicated to understand why those are the choices we have.
But it’s complicated to understand why those are the choices we have.
Tucker Carlson
I agree. Well, it’s a failure of the system. Clearly it’s not working. If you’ve got one guy over 80, the other guy almost at 80… People that age he should not be running anything.
I agree. Well, it’s a failure of the system. Clearly it’s not working. If you’ve got one guy over 80, the other guy almost at 80… People that age he should not be running anything.
Lex Fridman
You have on the Democratic side, you have Dean Phillips, you have RFK Jr until recently, I guess he’s independent. And then you have Vivek who are all younger people. Why did they not connect to a degree to where the people vote?
You have on the Democratic side, you have Dean Phillips, you have RFK Jr until recently, I guess he’s independent. And then you have Vivek who are all younger people. Why did they not connect to a degree to where the people vote?
Tucker Carlson
It’s such an interesting, I mean, I think it’s a really interesting question. There are a million different answers. And of course I don’t fully understand it even though I feel like I’ve watched it pretty carefully. But I would say the bottom line is there’s so much money vested in the federal apparatus, in the parties, in the government. As I said a minute ago, our economy’s dominated by monopolies but the greatest of all monopolies is the federal monopoly which oversees and controls all the other monopolies.
It’s such an interesting, I mean, I think it’s a really interesting question. There are a million different answers. And of course I don’t fully understand it even though I feel like I’ve watched it pretty carefully. But I would say the bottom line is there’s so much money vested in the federal apparatus, in the parties, in the government. As I said a minute ago, our economy’s dominated by monopolies but the greatest of all monopolies is the federal monopoly which oversees and controls all the other monopolies.
So it’s really substantially about the money. It’s not ideological. It’s about the money. And if someone controls the federal government, I mean at this point, it’s the most powerful organization in human history. It’s kind of hard to fight that. And in the case of Trump, I know the answer there. They raided Mar-a-Lago. They indicted him on bullshit charges. And I felt that in myself too. Even I was like, come on, come on. Whatever you think of Trump… And I agreed with his immigration views and I really like Trump personally. I think he’s hilarious and interesting, which he is. But it’s like, okay, there are a lot of people in this country.
At the very least, let’s have a real debate. The second… Messed up your cameras there, sorry, I’m getting excited. But the second they rated Mar-a-Lago on a documents charge, as someone from DC I was like, I know a lot about classification and all this stuff and been around it a lot. That’s so absurd that I was like, now it’s not about Trump, it’s about our system continuing. If you can take out a presidential candidate on a fake charge, use the justice system to take the guy out of the race, then we don’t have a representative democracy anymore. And I think a lot of Republican voters felt that way. If they hadn’t indicted him, I’m not sure he would be the nominee. I really don’t think he would be.
Lex Fridman
So now a vote for Trump is a kind of fuck you to the system.
So now a vote for Trump is a kind of fuck you to the system.
Tucker Carlson
Or an expression of your desire to keep the system that we had, which is one where voters get to decide. Prosecutors don’t get to decide. Look, they told us for four years that Trump was a super criminal or something. I’ve actually been friends with some super criminals. I’m a little less judgy than most. So I didn’t discount the possibility that he had… I don’t know. He’s in the real estate business in New York in the seventies. Did he kill someone? I don’t know.
Or an expression of your desire to keep the system that we had, which is one where voters get to decide. Prosecutors don’t get to decide. Look, they told us for four years that Trump was a super criminal or something. I’ve actually been friends with some super criminals. I’m a little less judgy than most. So I didn’t discount the possibility that he had… I don’t know. He’s in the real estate business in New York in the seventies. Did he kill someone? I don’t know.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Tucker Carlson
No, I’m not joking. And I’m not for killing people, but anything’s possible.
No, I’m not joking. And I’m not for killing people, but anything’s possible.
Lex Fridman
It’s good that you took a stand on that.
It’s good that you took a stand on that.
Tucker Carlson
No, I’m not joking. I was like, well, who knows?
No, I’m not joking. I was like, well, who knows?
Lex Fridman
Real estate.
Real estate.
Tucker Carlson
And I didn’t know. And what they came up with was a documents charge. Are you joking? And then the sitting president has the same documents violation, but he’s fine. It’s like, it’s just crazy this is happening in front of all of us. And then it becomes… At that point, it’s not about Joe Biden, it’s not about Donald Trump. It’s about preserving a system which has worked not perfectly, but pretty freaking well for 250 years. I know you don’t like Trump. I get it. Let’s not destroy that system. We can handle another four years of Trump. I think we can. Let’s all calm down. What we can’t handle is a country whose political system is run by the Justice Department. That is just, you’re freaking Ecuador at that point. No.
And I didn’t know. And what they came up with was a documents charge. Are you joking? And then the sitting president has the same documents violation, but he’s fine. It’s like, it’s just crazy this is happening in front of all of us. And then it becomes… At that point, it’s not about Joe Biden, it’s not about Donald Trump. It’s about preserving a system which has worked not perfectly, but pretty freaking well for 250 years. I know you don’t like Trump. I get it. Let’s not destroy that system. We can handle another four years of Trump. I think we can. Let’s all calm down. What we can’t handle is a country whose political system is run by the Justice Department. That is just, you’re freaking Ecuador at that point. No.
Lex Fridman
So speaking of the Justice Department, CIA and intelligence agencies of that nature, which… You’ve been traveling quite a bit, probably tracked by everybody. Which is the most powerful intelligence agency, do you think? CIA, Mossad, MI6, SVR? I could keep going. The Chinese.
So speaking of the Justice Department, CIA and intelligence agencies of that nature, which… You’ve been traveling quite a bit, probably tracked by everybody. Which is the most powerful intelligence agency, do you think? CIA, Mossad, MI6, SVR? I could keep going. The Chinese.
Tucker Carlson
It depends what you mean by powerful. Which one bats above its weight? We know. Which one-
It depends what you mean by powerful. Which one bats above its weight? We know. Which one-
Lex Fridman
Mossad, just to be clear, I guess is what you’re talking about.
Mossad, just to be clear, I guess is what you’re talking about.
Tucker Carlson
Well of course. Tiny country, very sophisticated intel service. Which one has the greatest global reach in comms? Which one is most able to read your texts? I assume the NSA, but Chinese are clearly pretty good. Israelis pretty good. The French actually are surprisingly good for kind of a declining country. Their intel services seem pretty impressive. No, I love France, but you know what I mean and all that. But the question… I grew up around all that stuff, that’s all totally fine. A strong country should have a strong and capable intel service so its policymakers can make informed decisions. That’s what they’re for. And so as Vladimir Putin himself noted, I don’t talk about it very much, but it’s true. I applied to the CIA when I was in college because I was familiar with it because of where I lived and had grown up and everything. And I was like, seemed interesting.
Well of course. Tiny country, very sophisticated intel service. Which one has the greatest global reach in comms? Which one is most able to read your texts? I assume the NSA, but Chinese are clearly pretty good. Israelis pretty good. The French actually are surprisingly good for kind of a declining country. Their intel services seem pretty impressive. No, I love France, but you know what I mean and all that. But the question… I grew up around all that stuff, that’s all totally fine. A strong country should have a strong and capable intel service so its policymakers can make informed decisions. That’s what they’re for. And so as Vladimir Putin himself noted, I don’t talk about it very much, but it’s true. I applied to the CIA when I was in college because I was familiar with it because of where I lived and had grown up and everything. And I was like, seemed interesting.
That’s honestly the only reason. I was like, live in foreign countries, see history happen. I’m for that. I applied to the Operations Directorate. They turned me down on the basis of drug use actually. True. But anyway, whatever. I was unsuited for it so I’m glad they turned me down. But the point is I didn’t see CIA as a threat, partly because I was bathing in propaganda about CIA and I didn’t really understand what it was and didn’t want to know. But second, because my impression at the time was it was outwardly focused. It was focused on our enemies. I don’t have a problem with that as much. The fact that CIA is playing in domestic politics and actually has for a long time, was involved in the Kennedy assassination, that’s not speculation. That’s a fact. And I confirmed that from someone who had read their documents that are still not public, it’s shocking.
You can’t have that. And the reason I’m so mad is I really believe in the idea of representative government. Acknowledging its imperfections, but I should have some say, I live here, I’m a citizen. I pay all your freaking taxes. So the fact that they would be tampering with American democracy is so outrageous to me. And I don’t know why Morning Joe is not outraged. This parade of dummies, highly credentialed dummies they have on Morning Joe every day. That doesn’t bother them at all. How could that not bother you? Why is only Glenn Greenwald mad about it? I mean, it’s confirmed. It’s not like a fever dream. It’s real. They played in the last election domestically, and I guess it shows how dumb I am because they’ve been doing that for many years. I mean, the guy who took out Mosaddegh lived on my street. One of the Roosevelts, CIA officer.
So I mean, again, I grew up around this stuff, but I never really thought… I never reached the obvious conclusion, which is that if the US government subverts democracy in other countries in the name of democracy, it will over time subvert democracy in my country. Why wouldn’t it? That is, the corruption is like core. It’s at the root of it. The purpose of the CIA was envisioned, at least publicly envisioned, as an intel gathering apparatus for the executive so the president could make wise foreign policy decisions. What the hell is happening in Country X? I don’t know. Let me call the agency in charge of finding out. The point wasn’t to freaking guarantee the outcome of elections.
Israel-Palestine
Lex Fridman
I’m doing an Israel Palestine debate next week, but I have to ask you just your thoughts, maybe even from a US perspective, what do you think about Hamas attacks on Israel? What would be the right thing for Israel to do and what’s the right thing for us to do in this? If you’re looking at the geopolitics of it.
I’m doing an Israel Palestine debate next week, but I have to ask you just your thoughts, maybe even from a US perspective, what do you think about Hamas attacks on Israel? What would be the right thing for Israel to do and what’s the right thing for us to do in this? If you’re looking at the geopolitics of it.
Tucker Carlson
I mean, it’s not a topic that I get into a lot because I’m a non-expert and because I’m not… Unlike every other American, I’m not emotionally invested in other countries just in general. I mean, I admire them or not, and I love visiting them. I love Jerusalem, probably my favorite city in the world, but I don’t have an emotional attachment to it. So maybe I’ve got more clarity. I don’t know, maybe less. Here’s my view. I believe in sovereignty as mentioned, and I think each country has to make decisions based on its own interest, but also with reference to its own capabilities and its own long-term interest.
I mean, it’s not a topic that I get into a lot because I’m a non-expert and because I’m not… Unlike every other American, I’m not emotionally invested in other countries just in general. I mean, I admire them or not, and I love visiting them. I love Jerusalem, probably my favorite city in the world, but I don’t have an emotional attachment to it. So maybe I’ve got more clarity. I don’t know, maybe less. Here’s my view. I believe in sovereignty as mentioned, and I think each country has to make decisions based on its own interest, but also with reference to its own capabilities and its own long-term interest.
And it’s very unwise for… I’m not a huge fan of treaties. Some are fine, too many bad. But I think US aid, military aid to Israel and the implied security guarantees, some explicit, but many implied, security guarantees of the United States to Israel probably haven’t helped Israel that much long-term. It’s a rich country with a highly capable population. Like every other country, it’s probably best if it makes its decisions based on what it can do by itself. So I would definitely be concerned if I lived in Israel because I think fair or unfair-
Tucker Carlson
Concerned if I lived in Israel because I think, fair or unfair, and really this is another product of technology, social media, public sentiment in that area is boiling over. I think it’s going to be hard for some of the governments in the region, Jordan, Egypt, Turkey, to contain their own population. They don’t want conflict with Israel at all. They were all pretty psyched actually for the trend in progress, the Saudi peace deal, which was never signed, but would’ve been great for everybody. Because trade peace, normal relations, that’s good, okay? Let’s just say. I know John Bolton doesn’t like it, but it’s good it, and it’s kind of what we should be looking for.
Concerned if I lived in Israel because I think, fair or unfair, and really this is another product of technology, social media, public sentiment in that area is boiling over. I think it’s going to be hard for some of the governments in the region, Jordan, Egypt, Turkey, to contain their own population. They don’t want conflict with Israel at all. They were all pretty psyched actually for the trend in progress, the Saudi peace deal, which was never signed, but would’ve been great for everybody. Because trade peace, normal relations, that’s good, okay? Let’s just say. I know John Bolton doesn’t like it, but it’s good it, and it’s kind of what we should be looking for.
But now it’s not possible. If you had a coalition of countries against Israel, I know Israel has nuclear weapons and has a capable military and all that and the backing of the United States, but it’s a small country, I think I’d be very worried. So there’s that. I don’t see any advantage to the United States. I mean, I think it’s important for each country to make its own decisions.
Lex Fridman
But it also is a place, like you said, where things are boiling over and it could spread across multiple nations into a major military conflict.
But it also is a place, like you said, where things are boiling over and it could spread across multiple nations into a major military conflict.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah. Well, I think it very easily could happen. In fact, probably right after Ramadan, if I had to guess. I pray it doesn’t. But again, I don’t think you can overstate the lack of wisdom, weakness, short-term thinking of American foreign policy leadership. These are the architects of the Iraq War, of the totally pointless destruction of Libya, totally pointless destruction of Syria, and the 20-year occupation of Afghanistan that resulted in a return to the status quo, of the Vietnam War. Their track record of the Korean war even going back 80 years is uninterrupted failures, one after the other.
Yeah. Well, I think it very easily could happen. In fact, probably right after Ramadan, if I had to guess. I pray it doesn’t. But again, I don’t think you can overstate the lack of wisdom, weakness, short-term thinking of American foreign policy leadership. These are the architects of the Iraq War, of the totally pointless destruction of Libya, totally pointless destruction of Syria, and the 20-year occupation of Afghanistan that resulted in a return to the status quo, of the Vietnam War. Their track record of the Korean war even going back 80 years is uninterrupted failures, one after the other.
So I just don’t have any confidence in those leaders to… When was the last time they improved another country? Can you think of that? Oh, the Marshall Plan. Well, you look at Europe now and you’re like, “I don’t know if that worked.” But even if it did work, again 80 years ago. So when was the last country American foreign policy makers improved? Netanyahu’s in a very difficult place, politically impossible. I mean, I’m glad I’m not Netanyahu, and I’m not sure he’s capable of making wise long-term decisions anyway. But if I was just an Israeli, I’d be like, “I don’t know if I want all this help and guidance.”
So yeah, I actually think it’s worse than just having just returned from the Middle East and talking to a lot of pretty open-minded sort of pro-Israeli Arabs who want stability above all. The merchant class always wants stability. So I’m on their side, I guess. They’re like, “Man, this could get super ugly super fast.” American leadership is completely absent. It’s just all posturing. People like Nikki Haley, you just wonder how does an advanced civilization promote someone like Nikki Haley to a position of authority? It’s like what? Adults are talking. Adults are talking. Nikki Haley, please go away.
That would be the appropriate response. But everyone’s so intimidated to be like, “Oh, she’s a strong woman.” She’s so transparently weak and sort of ridiculous and doesn’t know anything, and it’s just thinks that jumping up and down and making these absurd blanket statements, repeating bumper stickers just like leadership or something. It’s like a self-confident advanced society would never allow Nikki Haley to advance. I mean, she’s really not impressive. Sorry.
Lex Fridman
I just feel like you hold back too much and don’t tell us what you really think.
I just feel like you hold back too much and don’t tell us what you really think.
Tucker Carlson
Sorry.
Sorry.
Lex Fridman
I think you just speak your mind more often.
I think you just speak your mind more often.
Tucker Carlson
I mean, you can completely disagree with my opinions, but in the case of Nikki Haley, it’s not like an opinion formed just from watching television, which I don’t watch. It’s an opinion formed from knowing Nikki Haley, so.
I mean, you can completely disagree with my opinions, but in the case of Nikki Haley, it’s not like an opinion formed just from watching television, which I don’t watch. It’s an opinion formed from knowing Nikki Haley, so.
Lex Fridman
Strong words from Tucker, well felt too.
Strong words from Tucker, well felt too.
Tucker Carlson
Well, the world’s in the balance. I mean, it’s not just like-
Well, the world’s in the balance. I mean, it’s not just like-
Lex Fridman
Yes, yes. This is important stuff.
Yes, yes. This is important stuff.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah, it’s not just like, well, what should the capital gains rate be? It’s like, do we live or die? I don’t know. Let’s consult Nikki Haley. So if you’re asking should we live or die and consulting Nikki Haley, clearly you don’t care about the lives of your children. That’s how I feel.
Yeah, it’s not just like, well, what should the capital gains rate be? It’s like, do we live or die? I don’t know. Let’s consult Nikki Haley. So if you’re asking should we live or die and consulting Nikki Haley, clearly you don’t care about the lives of your children. That’s how I feel.
Xi Jinping
Lex Fridman
Not to try to get a preview or anything, but do you have interest of interviewing Xi Jinping? If you do, how will you approach that?
Not to try to get a preview or anything, but do you have interest of interviewing Xi Jinping? If you do, how will you approach that?
Tucker Carlson
I have enormous interest in doing that, enormous, and a couple other people and we’re working on it.
I have enormous interest in doing that, enormous, and a couple other people and we’re working on it.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I should also say, it’s been refreshing you interviewing world leaders. I think when I’ve started seeing you do that, it made me realize how much that’s lacking.
Yeah. I should also say, it’s been refreshing you interviewing world leaders. I think when I’ve started seeing you do that, it made me realize how much that’s lacking.
Tucker Carlson
Well, yeah, it’s just interesting. I mean-
Well, yeah, it’s just interesting. I mean-
Lex Fridman
From even a historical perspective, it’s interesting. But it’s also important from a geopolitics perspective.
From even a historical perspective, it’s interesting. But it’s also important from a geopolitics perspective.
Tucker Carlson
Well, it’s really changed my perspective and I’ve been going on about how American I am, and I think that’s a great thing. I love America. But it’s also we’re so physically geographically isolated from the world, even though I traveled a ton as a kid, a lot, more than most people. But even now I’m like, “I’m so parochial.” I see everything through this lens and getting out and seeing the rest of the world to which we really are connected, that’s real, is vitally important. So yeah. I mean, at this stage I don’t kind of need to do it, but I really want to, just motivated by curiosity and trying to expand my own mind and not be closed-minded and see the fullest perspective I possibly can in order to render wise judgments. I mean, that’s like the whole journey of life.
Well, it’s really changed my perspective and I’ve been going on about how American I am, and I think that’s a great thing. I love America. But it’s also we’re so physically geographically isolated from the world, even though I traveled a ton as a kid, a lot, more than most people. But even now I’m like, “I’m so parochial.” I see everything through this lens and getting out and seeing the rest of the world to which we really are connected, that’s real, is vitally important. So yeah. I mean, at this stage I don’t kind of need to do it, but I really want to, just motivated by curiosity and trying to expand my own mind and not be closed-minded and see the fullest perspective I possibly can in order to render wise judgments. I mean, that’s like the whole journey of life.
Lex Fridman
I was just hanging out with Rogan yesterday, Joe Rogan. I mentioned to him that as me being a fan of his show, that I would love for him to talk with you and he said he’s up for it. Any reason you guys haven’t done it already.
I was just hanging out with Rogan yesterday, Joe Rogan. I mentioned to him that as me being a fan of his show, that I would love for him to talk with you and he said he’s up for it. Any reason you guys haven’t done it already.
Tucker Carlson
I don’t know. I’ve only met Rogan once and I liked him. I met him at the UFC in New York. He was with somebody, a mutual friend of ours. Rogan changed media. I mean, maybe more than anybody. What I admire about Rogan without knowing him beyond meeting him that one time, I mean, I’m still in media, but I’ve always been in media. It’s not a great surprise. I’m doing what I’ve always done just a different format. But Rogan, he’s got one of those resumes that I admire. I like the guy who was like, “I was a longshoreman. I was a short order cook. I was an astrophysicist.” You know what I mean? You use to call it a man of parts. This guy was a fighter, a stand up comic. He hosted some Fear Factor. How did he wind up at the vanguard of the deepest conversations in the country? How did that happen? So I definitely respect that and I think it’s cool. Rogan is one of those people who just came out of nowhere. No one helped him. You know what I mean?
I don’t know. I’ve only met Rogan once and I liked him. I met him at the UFC in New York. He was with somebody, a mutual friend of ours. Rogan changed media. I mean, maybe more than anybody. What I admire about Rogan without knowing him beyond meeting him that one time, I mean, I’m still in media, but I’ve always been in media. It’s not a great surprise. I’m doing what I’ve always done just a different format. But Rogan, he’s got one of those resumes that I admire. I like the guy who was like, “I was a longshoreman. I was a short order cook. I was an astrophysicist.” You know what I mean? You use to call it a man of parts. This guy was a fighter, a stand up comic. He hosted some Fear Factor. How did he wind up at the vanguard of the deepest conversations in the country? How did that happen? So I definitely respect that and I think it’s cool. Rogan is one of those people who just came out of nowhere. No one helped him. You know what I mean?
Lex Fridman
He was doing the thing that he loves doing and it somehow keeps accidentally being exceptionally successful.
He was doing the thing that he loves doing and it somehow keeps accidentally being exceptionally successful.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah, and he’s curious. So that’s the main thing. There was a guy, without getting boring, but there was a guy I worked with years ago who kind of dominated cable news, Larry King. Everyone would always beat up on Larry King for being dumb. Well, I got to know Larry King well, and I was his fill in host for a while, and Larry King was just intensely curious. He’d be like, “Why do you wear a black tie, Lex?” You’d be like, “Because I like black tie.” “Why do you like a black tie? Everyone else wears a striped tie, but you wear a black one.” He was really interested.
Yeah, and he’s curious. So that’s the main thing. There was a guy, without getting boring, but there was a guy I worked with years ago who kind of dominated cable news, Larry King. Everyone would always beat up on Larry King for being dumb. Well, I got to know Larry King well, and I was his fill in host for a while, and Larry King was just intensely curious. He’d be like, “Why do you wear a black tie, Lex?” You’d be like, “Because I like black tie.” “Why do you like a black tie? Everyone else wears a striped tie, but you wear a black one.” He was really interested.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, genuinely so, yeah.
Yeah, genuinely so, yeah.
Tucker Carlson
Totally. I want to be like that. I don’t want to think I know everything. That’s so boorish and also false. You don’t know everything. But I see that in Rogan. Rogan’s like, “How does that work?”
Totally. I want to be like that. I don’t want to think I know everything. That’s so boorish and also false. You don’t know everything. But I see that in Rogan. Rogan’s like, “How does that work?”
Lex Fridman
100%.
100%.
Tucker Carlson
It’s so funny how that’s threatening to people. It’s like Rogan will just sit there while someone else is free balling on some far out topic, which by the way might be true, probably truer than the conventional explanation. People are like, “I don’t know, how can he stand that?” He had someone say, “The pyramids weren’t built 3,000 years ago, but 8,000 years ago, and that’s wrong.” It’s like, first of all, how do you know when the pyramids were built? Second, why do you care if someone disagrees with you? What is that?
It’s so funny how that’s threatening to people. It’s like Rogan will just sit there while someone else is free balling on some far out topic, which by the way might be true, probably truer than the conventional explanation. People are like, “I don’t know, how can he stand that?” He had someone say, “The pyramids weren’t built 3,000 years ago, but 8,000 years ago, and that’s wrong.” It’s like, first of all, how do you know when the pyramids were built? Second, why do you care if someone disagrees with you? What is that?
This weird kind of group think, it’s almost like fourth grade, there’s always some little girl in the front row who’s like acting as kind of the teacher’s enforcer. Whip around and be like, “Sit down. Didn’t you hear Mrs. Johnson said sit down.” It’s like the whole American media, “How dare you ask that question?” Rogan just seems like completely on his own trip. He doesn’t even hear it. He’s like, “Well, really where the pyramids built?” I was like, “Oh, I love that.”
Lex Fridman
Yeah, curiosity, open-mindedness.
Yeah, curiosity, open-mindedness.
Tucker Carlson
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
The thing I admire about him most, honestly, is that he’s a good father. He’s a good husband. He’s a good family man for many years. That’s his place where he escapes from the world too and it’s just beautiful.
The thing I admire about him most, honestly, is that he’s a good father. He’s a good husband. He’s a good family man for many years. That’s his place where he escapes from the world too and it’s just beautiful.
Tucker Carlson
Without that man, you’re destroyed.
Without that man, you’re destroyed.
Lex Fridman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Tucker Carlson
If I had a wife who was interested at all in any way in what I did, I think I would’ve gone crazy by now. When we get home, she’s like, “How was your day?” “It was great.” “Oh, I’m so proud of you.” That’s the end of our conversation about what I do for a living. That is such a wonderful and essential respite from, you said how do I not become an asshole to the extent I haven’t, I kind of have. How have I not been transformed into a totally insufferable megalomaniac who is checking his Twitter replies every day or every minute? It’s that. Yeah. The core of your life has to be solid and enduring and not just ephemeral and silly.
If I had a wife who was interested at all in any way in what I did, I think I would’ve gone crazy by now. When we get home, she’s like, “How was your day?” “It was great.” “Oh, I’m so proud of you.” That’s the end of our conversation about what I do for a living. That is such a wonderful and essential respite from, you said how do I not become an asshole to the extent I haven’t, I kind of have. How have I not been transformed into a totally insufferable megalomaniac who is checking his Twitter replies every day or every minute? It’s that. Yeah. The core of your life has to be solid and enduring and not just ephemeral and silly.
Lex Fridman
So the two of you have known each other for what, 40 years?
So the two of you have known each other for what, 40 years?
Tucker Carlson
We’ve been together 40 years.
We’ve been together 40 years.
Lex Fridman
Together 40 years.
Together 40 years.
Tucker Carlson
40 years, yeah, 1984. Was the hottest 15-year old in Newport, Rhode Island.
40 years, yeah, 1984. Was the hottest 15-year old in Newport, Rhode Island.
Lex Fridman
Wow.
Wow.
Tucker Carlson
It sounds dirty, but I’m talking about myself, I was the hottest.
It sounds dirty, but I’m talking about myself, I was the hottest.
Lex Fridman
[inaudible 02:45:29]. Yeah. You were just looking in the mirror.
[inaudible 02:45:29]. Yeah. You were just looking in the mirror.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
Very nice. So what’s the secret to successful relationship, successful marriage?
Very nice. So what’s the secret to successful relationship, successful marriage?
Tucker Carlson
I don’t even know. I mean, no, I’m serious. I got married in August ’91, so that’s our 30 year of being married.
I don’t even know. I mean, no, I’m serious. I got married in August ’91, so that’s our 30 year of being married.
Lex Fridman
The collapse of the Soviet Union.
The collapse of the Soviet Union.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah, yeah, yeah. As noted. Yeah. So you hear these people, it’s actually changed my theology a little bit. Not that I have deep theology, but I grew up in a society in Southern California when I was little. That was a totally self-created society. I mean, Southern California was that root of libertarianism for a reason. It was like that’s where you went to recreate yourself. So the operative assumption there is that you are the sum total of your choices and that free will is everything. We never consider questions like, well, why do children get cancer? What do they do to deserve it? Well, of course nothing, right? Because that would suggest that maybe you’re not the sum total.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. As noted. Yeah. So you hear these people, it’s actually changed my theology a little bit. Not that I have deep theology, but I grew up in a society in Southern California when I was little. That was a totally self-created society. I mean, Southern California was that root of libertarianism for a reason. It was like that’s where you went to recreate yourself. So the operative assumption there is that you are the sum total of your choices and that free will is everything. We never consider questions like, well, why do children get cancer? What do they do to deserve it? Well, of course nothing, right? Because that would suggest that maybe you’re not the sum total.
Your choices matter. If I smoke a lot, I get lung cancer. If I use fentanyl, I may OD. Got it. If I don’t exercise, I might get fat, okay. But on a bigger scale, you’re not only the sum total of your choices. Things happen to you that you didn’t deserve, good and bad. Marriages, and I’ll speak for myself, in my case, just one of them. I mean, clearly spending time with the person you’re married to, talking, enjoying each other. I have a lot of rituals. We have a lot of rituals that ensure that. But in 40 years, you’re like a different person.
I did drugs. I was drinking all the time when we met. It’s been a long time since I’ve done that. I’m very different and so is she, but we’re different in ways that are complementary and happy. We’ve never been happier. So how do we pull that off? Just kind of good luck, honestly. Then I see other people… No, I’m not kidding. But that’s true. I think it’s so important not to flatter yourself if you’ve been successful at something. The thing I’ve been most successful at is marriage, but it’s not really me. I mean, I haven’t-
Lex Fridman
So I think what you’re indirectly communicating is it’s like humility, I think.
So I think what you’re indirectly communicating is it’s like humility, I think.
Tucker Carlson
It’s not even humility. Humility is the result of a reality-based worldview, okay?
It’s not even humility. Humility is the result of a reality-based worldview, okay?
Lex Fridman
Sure, right.
Sure, right.
Tucker Carlson
Once you see things clearly, then you know that you are not the author of all your successes or failures. I hate the implication otherwise because it suggests powers that people don’t have. It’s one of the reasons I always hated the smoking debate or the COVID debate. Someone die of COVID, didn’t have the vaccine. They’d be like, “See, that’s what you get.” You smoke cigarettes, you die. Well, yeah, if you smoke cigarettes, you’re more likely to get lung cancer. Whatever. Cause and effect is real. I’m not denying its existence. It’s obvious, but it’s not the whole story. There are larger forces acting on us, unseen forces. That’s just a fact. You don’t need to be some kind of religious nut and they act on AI too and you should keep that in mind. The idea that all-
Once you see things clearly, then you know that you are not the author of all your successes or failures. I hate the implication otherwise because it suggests powers that people don’t have. It’s one of the reasons I always hated the smoking debate or the COVID debate. Someone die of COVID, didn’t have the vaccine. They’d be like, “See, that’s what you get.” You smoke cigarettes, you die. Well, yeah, if you smoke cigarettes, you’re more likely to get lung cancer. Whatever. Cause and effect is real. I’m not denying its existence. It’s obvious, but it’s not the whole story. There are larger forces acting on us, unseen forces. That’s just a fact. You don’t need to be some kind of religious nut and they act on AI too and you should keep that in mind. The idea that all-
Tucker Carlson
It’s missing why you said that.
It’s missing why you said that.
Tucker Carlson
No, it’s true. It’s demonstrably true. We’re the only society that hasn’t acknowledged the truth of that. The idea that the only things that are real are the things that we can see or measure in a lab. That’s insane. That’s just dumb.
No, it’s true. It’s demonstrably true. We’re the only society that hasn’t acknowledged the truth of that. The idea that the only things that are real are the things that we can see or measure in a lab. That’s insane. That’s just dumb.
Lex Fridman
In the religious context, you have this two categories that I really like of the two kinds of people, people who believe they’re God and people who know they’re not, which is a really interesting division that speaks to humility and a kind of realist worldview of where we are in the world.
In the religious context, you have this two categories that I really like of the two kinds of people, people who believe they’re God and people who know they’re not, which is a really interesting division that speaks to humility and a kind of realist worldview of where we are in the world.
Tucker Carlson
Oh.
Oh.
Lex Fridman
Can atheists be in the latter category?
Can atheists be in the latter category?
Tucker Carlson
No. There are very few atheists. I’ve never actually met one. There are people who pose as atheists, but no one’s purely rational. Everyone, I mean, this is a cliche for a reason, everyone under extreme stress appeals to a power higher than himself because everyone knows that there is a power higher than himself. So really it’s just people who are gripped with a delusion that they’re God. No one actually believes that. If you’re God, jump off the roof of your garage and see what happens. You know what I mean? No one actually thinks that, but people behave as if it’s true, and those people are dangerous. I will say by contrast, the only people I trust are the people who know their limits.
No. There are very few atheists. I’ve never actually met one. There are people who pose as atheists, but no one’s purely rational. Everyone, I mean, this is a cliche for a reason, everyone under extreme stress appeals to a power higher than himself because everyone knows that there is a power higher than himself. So really it’s just people who are gripped with a delusion that they’re God. No one actually believes that. If you’re God, jump off the roof of your garage and see what happens. You know what I mean? No one actually thinks that, but people behave as if it’s true, and those people are dangerous. I will say by contrast, the only people I trust are the people who know their limits.
I was thinking actually this morning in my sauna, of all the people I’ve interviewed or met, this is someone I’ve never interviewed, but I have talked to him a couple of times, the greatest leader I’ve ever met in the world is literally a king. It’s MB Sheikh Mohammed of Abu Dhabi, who is Muslim. I’m definitely not Muslim. I’m Christian, Protestant Christian. So I don’t agree with his religion and I don’t agree with monarchies, but he’s the best leader in the world that I’ve ever met, and by far, it’s not even close. Why is that? Well, I could bore you for an hour on the subject, but the reason that he’s such a good leader is because he’s guided by an ever-present knowledge of his limitations and of the limits of his power and of his foresight.
When you start there, when you start with reality, it’s not even humility. Humility can be a pose like, “Oh, I’m so humble.” Okay, humble brag is a phrase for a reason. It’s like way deeper than that’s just like, no, do I have magical powers? Can I see the future? No. Okay. That’s just a fact. So I’m not God, but I’ve never seen anybody more at ease with admitting that than MBZ, just a remarkable person. For that reason, he is treated as an oracle. I don’t think people understand the number of world leaders who traipse through his house or palace to seek his counsel. I’m not sure that there is a parallel since, I don’t want to get too hyperbolic here, but honestly, since Solomon, where people come from around the world to ask what he thinks.
Now, why would they be doing that? Because Abu Dhabi’s military is so powerful? I mean, he’s rich, okay, massive oil and gas deposits, but so is Canada. You know what I mean? No one is coming to Ottawa to ask Justin Trudeau what he thinks. No, it’s humility. That’s where wisdom comes from. You start to think, I spent my whole life mad at America’s leadership class, because it’s not just Biden or the people in official positions, it’s the whole constellation of advisors and throne sniffers around them. It’s not even that I disagree with them. It’s I’m not impressed by them. I’m just not impressed. They’re not that capable, right? So that’s what I was saying about Nikki Haley. I don’t think Nikki Haley’s the most evil person in the world. I just think she’s ridiculous, obviously. Everyone’s like, “Oh, Nikki Haley or Mike Pompeo.” What?
Lex Fridman
Great leaders are so rare that when you see one, you know it right away.
Great leaders are so rare that when you see one, you know it right away.
Tucker Carlson
It blows your mind. What blows my mind about Sheikh Mohammed in Abu Dhabi is that everyone in the world knows it. I’ve never seen a story on this, and I’m not guessing, I know this is true because I’ve seen it. Everyone in the world knows it. So if there’s a conflict, he’s the only person that people call. Everybody calls the same guy. It’s like he runs this tiny little country, the UAE, in Abu Dhabi there are a bunch of Emirates, but he’s the president of the country, but still, and it’s got a ton of energy and all that wealth and all that. Dubai’s got great real estate and restaurants, but really it’s a tiny little country that wasn’t even a country 50 years ago. So how did that happen? Purely on the basis of his humility and the wisdom that results from that humility. That’s it.
It blows your mind. What blows my mind about Sheikh Mohammed in Abu Dhabi is that everyone in the world knows it. I’ve never seen a story on this, and I’m not guessing, I know this is true because I’ve seen it. Everyone in the world knows it. So if there’s a conflict, he’s the only person that people call. Everybody calls the same guy. It’s like he runs this tiny little country, the UAE, in Abu Dhabi there are a bunch of Emirates, but he’s the president of the country, but still, and it’s got a ton of energy and all that wealth and all that. Dubai’s got great real estate and restaurants, but really it’s a tiny little country that wasn’t even a country 50 years ago. So how did that happen? Purely on the basis of his humility and the wisdom that results from that humility. That’s it.
Advice for young people
Lex Fridman
What advice would you give to young people? You got four, you somehow made them into great human beings. What advice would you give people in high school?
What advice would you give to young people? You got four, you somehow made them into great human beings. What advice would you give people in high school?
Tucker Carlson
Have children immediately.
Have children immediately.
Lex Fridman
Oh that.
Oh that.
Tucker Carlson
Including in high school? Yes, I think that. That’s all that matters in the end. Again, these aren’t even cliches anymore because no one says them. But when I was a kid, people always say, “On your deathbed, you never wish you’d spent more time at work.” I mean, everyone said that. It was like one of these things. Now, I don’t think Google allows you to say that. It’s like, “No, you’re going to wish you spent more time at work. Get back to your cube.” But I can’t overstate from my vantage how true that is. Nothing else matters but your family.
Including in high school? Yes, I think that. That’s all that matters in the end. Again, these aren’t even cliches anymore because no one says them. But when I was a kid, people always say, “On your deathbed, you never wish you’d spent more time at work.” I mean, everyone said that. It was like one of these things. Now, I don’t think Google allows you to say that. It’s like, “No, you’re going to wish you spent more time at work. Get back to your cube.” But I can’t overstate from my vantage how true that is. Nothing else matters but your family.
If you have the opportunity, and a lot of people are being denied the opportunity to have children, and this messing with the gender roles, and I’m not even talking about the tranny stuff, I mean, feminism has so destroyed people’s brains and the ability of young people to connect with each other and stay together and have fruitful lives. It’s like nothing’s been more destructive than that. It’s such a lie. It’s so dumb. It’s counter to human nature, and nothing counter to human nature can endure. It can only cause suffering and that’s what it’s done. But fight that. Stop complaining about it. Find someone.
By the way, everyone gets together, or most people get together on the basis, in a Western society where there’s no arranged marriages, they get together on a basis of sexual attraction. Totally natural. Get off your birth control and have children. “Oh, I can’t afford that.” Well, yeah, you’ll figure out a way to afford it once you have kids. It’s like it’s chicken in the egg, but it’s actually not. When you have responsibility, when you have no… This is true of men, I’m not sure if true of women, but it’s definitely true of men, you will not achieve until you have no choice. Because I always think of men, men do nothing until they have to, but once they have to, they will do anything. That is true.
Men will do nothing unless they have to. But once they have to, they will do anything. I really believe that from watching and from being one. I would never have done anything if I didn’t have to, but I had to and I would just recommend it. By the way, even if you don’t succeed, even if you’re poor, having spent my life among rich people, I grew up among rich people, I am a rich person. Boy, are they unhappy? Well, that’s clearly not the road to happiness. You don’t want to be a debt slave or starved to death or anything like that, but making a billion dollars, that’s not worth doing. Don’t do that. Don’t even try to do that.
If you create something that’s beautiful and worth having and you make a billion dollars, okay, then you have to deal with your billion dollars, which will be the worst part of your life, trust me. But seeking money for its own sake is a dead end. What you should seek for its own sake is children. Talk about a creative act. Last thing I’ll say, the whole point of life is to create, okay? The act of creation, which is dying in the West, in the arts and in its most pure expression, which is children, that’s all that’s worth doing while you’re alive is creating something beautiful. Creating children, by the way, it’s super fun. It’s not hard. I can get more technical off the earth if you want.
Lex Fridman
Can you? Yeah, please.
Can you? Yeah, please.
Tucker Carlson
I have a lot of thoughts on it.
I have a lot of thoughts on it.
Lex Fridman
Do you have documents or something?
Do you have documents or something?
Tucker Carlson
No, I can draw you a schematic.
No, I can draw you a schematic.
Lex Fridman
Oh, thank you.
Oh, thank you.
Tucker Carlson
But yeah, that’s the greatest thing. The fact that corporate America denies, “Oh, freeze your eggs. Have an abortion.” What? You’re evil. Are you kidding? Because you’re taking from people the only thing that can possibly give them enduring joy. They are successfully taking it from people, and I hate them for it.
But yeah, that’s the greatest thing. The fact that corporate America denies, “Oh, freeze your eggs. Have an abortion.” What? You’re evil. Are you kidding? Because you’re taking from people the only thing that can possibly give them enduring joy. They are successfully taking it from people, and I hate them for it.
Lex Fridman
You founded TCN, Tucker Carlson Network.
You founded TCN, Tucker Carlson Network.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
What’s your vision for it?
What’s your vision for it?
Tucker Carlson
I have no vision for myself, for my career, and I never have. So I’m the last person to explain.
I have no vision for myself, for my career, and I never have. So I’m the last person to explain.
Lex Fridman
You just roll with it.
You just roll with it.
Tucker Carlson
Yeah, I’m an instinct guy, 100%. I have a vision for the world, but I don’t have a vision for my life, for my career. So really my vision extended precisely this far, I just want to keep doing what I’m doing. I just want to keep doing what I’m doing. There was a five hour period where I wondered if I would be able to, because I feel pretty spry and alert, and I’m certainly deeply enjoying what I’m doing, which is talking to people and saying what I think and learning, constantly learning. But I just wanted to keep doing that and I also wanted to employ the people who I worked with at Fox. I’ve worked with the same people for years, and I love them. So I had all these people and I wanted to bring them with me so we had to build a structure for that.
Yeah, I’m an instinct guy, 100%. I have a vision for the world, but I don’t have a vision for my life, for my career. So really my vision extended precisely this far, I just want to keep doing what I’m doing. I just want to keep doing what I’m doing. There was a five hour period where I wondered if I would be able to, because I feel pretty spry and alert, and I’m certainly deeply enjoying what I’m doing, which is talking to people and saying what I think and learning, constantly learning. But I just wanted to keep doing that and I also wanted to employ the people who I worked with at Fox. I’ve worked with the same people for years, and I love them. So I had all these people and I wanted to bring them with me so we had to build a structure for that.
Lex Fridman
But this feels like one of the first times you’re really working for yourself. There’s an extra level of freedom here.
But this feels like one of the first times you’re really working for yourself. There’s an extra level of freedom here.
Tucker Carlson
Totally, totally. You don’t want me doing your taxes. I’m good at some things, but I’m really not good at others, so. One of them would be running a business. No idea. I’m not interested, not a commerce guy, so I don’t buy anything. So it’s like the whole thing I’m not good at. But luckily, I’m really blessed to have friends who are involved in this who are good at that. So I feel positive about it, but mostly I am totally committed to only doing the things that I am good at and enjoy and not doing anything else because I don’t want to waste my time. So I’m just getting to do what I want to do and I’m really loving it.
Totally, totally. You don’t want me doing your taxes. I’m good at some things, but I’m really not good at others, so. One of them would be running a business. No idea. I’m not interested, not a commerce guy, so I don’t buy anything. So it’s like the whole thing I’m not good at. But luckily, I’m really blessed to have friends who are involved in this who are good at that. So I feel positive about it, but mostly I am totally committed to only doing the things that I am good at and enjoy and not doing anything else because I don’t want to waste my time. So I’m just getting to do what I want to do and I’m really loving it.
Hope for the future
Lex Fridman
What hope, positive hope do you have for the future of human civilization in say 50 years, 100 years, 200 years?
What hope, positive hope do you have for the future of human civilization in say 50 years, 100 years, 200 years?
Tucker Carlson
People are great just by their nature. I mean, they’re super complicated, but I like people. I always have liked people. If I was sitting here with Nikki Haley, who I guess I’ve been pretty clear I’m not a mega fan of Nikki Haley’s, I would enjoy it. I’ve never met anybody I couldn’t enjoy on some level given enough time. So as long as nobody tampers with the human recipe, the human nature itself, I will always feel blessed by being around other people. That’s true around the world. I’ve never been to a country, and I’ve been to scores of countries, where I didn’t, given a week, really like it and the people. So yeah, bad leaders are a recurring theme in human history. They’re mostly bad, and we’ve got an unusually bad set right now, but we’ll have better ones at some point. One thing I don’t like more than nuclear weapons and more than AI, the one thing that really, really bothers me is the idea of using technology to change the human brain permanently. Because you’re tampering with the secret sauce. You’re tampering with God’s creation, and totally evil. I mean, I literally sat there the other day with Klaus Schwab. I was with Klaus Schwab. He was like a total moron, like 100 years old and has no idea what’s going on in the world. But he’s one of these guys who, speaking of mediocre, everyone’s so afraid of Klaus Schwab, I don’t think Klaus Schwab is going to be organizing anything. Again, he’s just like a total figurehead, like a douchebag.
People are great just by their nature. I mean, they’re super complicated, but I like people. I always have liked people. If I was sitting here with Nikki Haley, who I guess I’ve been pretty clear I’m not a mega fan of Nikki Haley’s, I would enjoy it. I’ve never met anybody I couldn’t enjoy on some level given enough time. So as long as nobody tampers with the human recipe, the human nature itself, I will always feel blessed by being around other people. That’s true around the world. I’ve never been to a country, and I’ve been to scores of countries, where I didn’t, given a week, really like it and the people. So yeah, bad leaders are a recurring theme in human history. They’re mostly bad, and we’ve got an unusually bad set right now, but we’ll have better ones at some point. One thing I don’t like more than nuclear weapons and more than AI, the one thing that really, really bothers me is the idea of using technology to change the human brain permanently. Because you’re tampering with the secret sauce. You’re tampering with God’s creation, and totally evil. I mean, I literally sat there the other day with Klaus Schwab. I was with Klaus Schwab. He was like a total moron, like 100 years old and has no idea what’s going on in the world. But he’s one of these guys who, speaking of mediocre, everyone’s so afraid of Klaus Schwab, I don’t think Klaus Schwab is going to be organizing anything. Again, he’s just like a total figurehead, like a douchebag.
But anyway, but he was talking and he’s reading all these talking points, all the cool kids are talking about Adapos and whatever, and he starts talking about it in his way, his accent, he was saying, “I think it’s so important that we follow an ethical way, always in an ethical way, of course, very ethical. I’m a very ethical man, that we follow using technology to improve the human mind and implant the chips in the brain.” I’m like, “Okay, you have no idea what you’re talking about. You’re as senile as Joe Biden.” But what was so striking is that no one in the room is like, “Wait, what? You’re with people’s brains. Oh my God. What are you even talking about? Who do you think you are?”
Lex Fridman
I mean, you’re right, the secret sauce. The human mind is really special. We should not mess with it.
I mean, you’re right, the secret sauce. The human mind is really special. We should not mess with it.
Tucker Carlson
It’s all that matters, dude.
It’s all that matters, dude.
Lex Fridman
We should be very careful. Whatever special thing it does, it seems like it’s a good thing. Human beings are fundamentally good. These sources of creativity, the creative force in the universe we don’t want to mess with.
We should be very careful. Whatever special thing it does, it seems like it’s a good thing. Human beings are fundamentally good. These sources of creativity, the creative force in the universe we don’t want to mess with.
Tucker Carlson
Oh, I mean, what else matters? I don’t understand. I mean, I guess, look, I don’t want to seem like the Unabomber and I’m not.
Oh, I mean, what else matters? I don’t understand. I mean, I guess, look, I don’t want to seem like the Unabomber and I’m not.
Lex Fridman
We are in a cabin in the woods.
We are in a cabin in the woods.
Tucker Carlson
No. Well, I’m sympathetic to some of his ideas, but not of course sending mail bombs to people because I like people and I don’t believe in violence at all. But I think the problem with technology, one of the problems with technology is the way that people approach it in a very kind of mindless heedless way. I think it’s important, this idea that it’s inexorable and we can’t control it, and if we don’t do it, someone else will. There’s some truth in that, but it’s not the whole story. We do have free will and we are creating these things intentionally, and I think it’s incumbent on us, it’s a requirement, of a moral requirement of us that we ask, is this a net gain or a net loss? What, to the extent we can foresee them, will the effects be, et cetera, et cetera?
No. Well, I’m sympathetic to some of his ideas, but not of course sending mail bombs to people because I like people and I don’t believe in violence at all. But I think the problem with technology, one of the problems with technology is the way that people approach it in a very kind of mindless heedless way. I think it’s important, this idea that it’s inexorable and we can’t control it, and if we don’t do it, someone else will. There’s some truth in that, but it’s not the whole story. We do have free will and we are creating these things intentionally, and I think it’s incumbent on us, it’s a requirement, of a moral requirement of us that we ask, is this a net gain or a net loss? What, to the extent we can foresee them, will the effects be, et cetera, et cetera?
It’s not super complicated. So I prize long-term thinking. I don’t always apply to my own life, obviously. I want to, but I prize it. I think that people with power should think about future generations and I don’t see that kind of thinking at all. They all seem like children to me, and don’t give children handguns because they can hurt people.
Lex Fridman
Fundamentally, you want people in power to be pro-humanity.
Fundamentally, you want people in power to be pro-humanity.
Tucker Carlson
By the way, you don’t want people who are 81 who are going to die anyway. Why do they care? By the way, if your track record with your own family is miserable, why would I give you my family to oversee? Again, these are autistic level questions that someone should answer.
By the way, you don’t want people who are 81 who are going to die anyway. Why do they care? By the way, if your track record with your own family is miserable, why would I give you my family to oversee? Again, these are autistic level questions that someone should answer.
Lex Fridman
Well, thank you for asking those questions, first of all, and thank you for this conversation. Thank you for welcoming me to the cabin in the woods.
Well, thank you for asking those questions, first of all, and thank you for this conversation. Thank you for welcoming me to the cabin in the woods.
Tucker Carlson
Thank you.
Thank you.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Tucker Carlson. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, let me leave you with some words from Mahatma Gandhi. When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it, always. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Tucker Carlson. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. Now, let me leave you with some words from Mahatma Gandhi. When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it, always. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Transcript for Bill Ackman: Investing, Financial Battles, Harvard, DEI, X & Free Speech | Lex Fridman Podcast #413
This is a transcript of Lex Fridman Podcast #413 with Bill Ackman.
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
The timestamps in the transcript are clickable links that take you directly to that point in
the main video. Please note that the transcript is human generated, and may have errors.
Here are some useful links:
- Go back to this episode’s main page
- Watch the full YouTube version of the podcast
Table of Contents
Here are the loose “chapters” in the conversation.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
In your lecture on the basics of finance and investing, you mentioned a book, Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham, as being formative in your life. What key lesson do you take away from that book that informs your own investing?
And the key is to figure out what something’s worth and you have to kind of weigh it. He talked about the difference between… He said the stock market in the short term is a voting machine. It represents speculative interests, supply and demand of people in the short term. But in the long term, the stock market’s a weighing machine, much more accurate. It’s going to tell you what something’s worth. And so if you can define what something’s worth, then you can really take advantage of the market because it’s really here to help you. And that’s kind of the message of the book.
How many widgets are going to sell this year, how many are going to sell next year, what are the costs going to be? How much of the money that they generate? Do they need to reinvest in the business to keep the business going? And that’s more complicated. But what we do is we try to find businesses where, with a very high degree of confidence, we know what those cash flows are going to be for a very long time. And very few businesses that you can have a really high degree of certainty about. And as a result, many investments are speculations because it’s really very difficult to predict the future. So what we do for a living, what I do for a living is find those rare companies that you can kind of predict what they’re going to look like over a very long period of time.
They’re the best at taking an artist who’s 18 years old, who’s got a great voice, and has started to get a presence on YouTube and Instagram and helping that artist become a superstar. And that’s a unique talent. And the end result is the best artists in the world want to come work for them, but they also have this incredible library of the Beatles, the Rolling Stone, U2, et cetera. And then if you think about what music has become… It used to be about what records and CDs and eight track tapes for those of whom… And it was about a new format and that’s how they drive sales. And it’s become a business which is like the podcast business, streaming. And streaming is a lot more predictable than selling records. You can sort of say, “Okay, how many people have smartphones? How many people are going to have smartphones next year?”
There’s a kind of global penetration over time of smartphones. You pay, call it, 10, 11 bucks a month for a subscription or less for a family plan and you can kind of build a model of what the world looks like and predict the growth of the streaming business, predict what kind of market share Universal is going to have over time. You can’t get to a precise view of value. You can get to an approximation. And the key is to buy at a price that represents a big discount to that approximation. And that gets back to Ben Graham. Ben Graham invented this concept of margin of safety. You want to buy a company at a price that if you’re wrong about what you think it’s worth and it turns out to be worth 30% less, you paid a deep enough discount to your estimate that you’re still okay. A big part of investing is not losing money. If you can avoid losing money and then have a few great hits, you can do very, very well over time.
And I can’t envision a world beyond streaming in a sense… Now you may have a Neuralink chip in your head instead of a phone, but the music can come in a digitized kind of format, you’re going to want to have an infinite library that you can walk around in your pocket or in your brain. It’s not going to matter that much of the form factor. The device changes. It’s not really that important whether it’s Spotify or Apple or Amazon that are the so-called DSPs or the providers. I think the value is really going to reside in the content owners. And that’s really the artists and the label.
Conference call transcripts are publicly available. It’s very helpful to go back five years and learn the story. “Here’s how management describes their business, here’s what they say they’re going to do,” and you can follow along to see what they do. It’s like a historical record of how competent and truthful they are. It’s a very useful device. And then, of course, looking at competitors and thinking about what could dislodge this company. And then we’ll talk to… If it’s an industry we don’t know well… We know the restaurant industry really well. Music industry, we will talk to people in the industry. We’ll try to understand the difference between publishing and recorded music. We’ll look at the competitors, we’ll read books. I read a book about the music industry or a couple books about the industry.
So it’s a bit like a big research project. And these, so-called expert networks now, and you can get pretty much anyone on the phone and they’ll talk to you about an aspect of the industry that you don’t understand, want to learn more about. Try to get a sense… Public filings of companies generally give you a lot of information, but not everything you want to know. And you can learn more by talking to experts about some of the industry dynamics, the personalities. You want to get a sense of management. I like watching podcasts. If a CEO were to do a podcast or a YouTube interview, you get a sense of the people.
So we can’t earn the kind of returns we want to earn for investors by paying a really high price. Price matters a lot. You can buy the best business in the world and if you overpay, you’re not going to earn particularly attractive returns. So we get involved in cases where a great business has kind of made a big mistake or you’ve a company that’s kind of lost its way, but it’s recoverable. And we buy from shareholders who are disappointed, who’ve lost confidence, selling at a low price relative to what it’s worth if fixed. And then we try to be helpful in fixing the company.
The beauty of the restaurant business… Our best track record is in restaurants. We’ve never lost money. We’ve only made a fortune, interestingly, investing restaurants. A big part of it, it’s a really simple business. If you get Chipotle right and you’re at a hundred stores, it’s not so hard to envision getting to 200 stores and then getting to 500 stores, right? And the key is maintaining the brand image, growing intelligently, having the right systems. Now when you go from a hundred stores to 3,500 stores, you have to know what you’re doing and there’s a lot of complexity. If you think about your local restaurant, the family’s working in the business, they’re watching the cash register, and you can probably open another restaurant across town, but there are very few restaurant operators that own more than a few restaurants and operate them successfully.
And the quick service business is about systems and building a model that a stranger who doesn’t know the restaurant industry can come in and enter the business and build a successful franchise. Now, Chipotle is not a franchise company. They actually own all their own stores, but many of the most successful restaurant companies are franchise models like a Burger King, a McDonald’s, Tim Horton’s, all these various brands, Popeyes. And there it’s about systems, but the same systems apply whether you own all the stores and it’s run by a big corporation or whether the owners of the restaurants are sort of franchisees, local entrepreneurs.
So you’d open your computer and you open your search and very high percentage of the world starts with a Google page in one line where you type in your search. The Google advertising, search, YouTube franchise is one of the most dominant franchises in the world. Very difficult to disrupt, extremely profitable. The world is moving from offline advertising to online advertising. And that trend, I think, continues. Why? Because you can actually see whether your ads work. They used to say about advertising, “You spend a fortune and you just don’t know which 50% of it works, but you just sort of spend the money because you know ultimately that’s going to bring in the customer.” And now with online advertising, you can see with granularity which dollars I’m spending… When people click on the search term and end up buying something and I pay, it’s a very high return on investment for the advertiser and they really dominate that business.
Now, AI, of course, is a risk. If all of a sudden people start searching or asking questions of ChatGPT and don’t start with the Google search bar, that’s a risk to the company. And so our view, based on work we had done and talked to industry experts, is that Google, by virtue of the investment they’ve made the time, the energy that people put into it, we felt their AI capabilities were, if anything, potentially greater than Microsoft ChatGPT and that the market had overreacted. And because Google is a big company, global business regulators scrutinized it incredibly carefully. They couldn’t take some of the same liberties a startup like OpenAI did in releasing a product. And I think Google took a more cautious approach in releasing an early version of Bard in terms of its capabilities. And that led the world to believe that they were behind.
And we ultimately concluded, if anything, they’re tied or ahead and you’re paying nothing for that potential business. And they also have huge advantages by virtue… If you think of all the data Google has, the search data, all the various applications, email and otherwise, and the Google suite of products, it’s an incredible data set. So they have more training data than pretty much any company in the world. They have incredible engineers, they have enormous financial resources. So that was kind of the bet. And we still think it’s probably the cheapest of the big seven companies in terms of the price you’re paying for the business relative to its current earnings. It also is a business that has a lot of potential for efficiency. Sometimes when you have this enormously profitable dominant company… All of the technology companies in the post March ’20 world grew enormously in terms of their teams and they probably overhired.
And so you’ve seen the Facebooks of the world and now even Google starting to get a little more efficient in terms of their operation. So we paid a low multiple for the business. One way to think about the value of the business is the price you pay for the earnings or alternatively what’s the yield? If you flip over the price over the earnings, it gives you kind of the yield of the business. So a 15 multiple is about almost a seven and a half percent yield. And that earnings yield is growing over time as the business grows. Compare it to what you can earn lending your money to the government, 4%, that’s a very attractive going in yield.
And then there’s all kinds of, what we call, optionality in all the various businesses and investments they’ve made that are losing money. They’ve got a cloud business that’s growing very rapidly, but they’re investing basically a hundred percent of the profits from that business and growth. So you’re in that earnings number, you’re not seeing any earnings from the cloud business, and they’re one of the top cloud players. So very interesting, generally well-managed company with incredible assets and resources and dominance, and it has no debt. It’s got a ton of cash. And so pretty good story.
Conference calls are actually relatively recent. When I started in the business, there weren’t conference call transcripts. Now you have a written record of everything management has said in response to questions from analysts, at conferences and otherwise. And so just you learn a lot about people by listening to what they say, how they answer questions, and ultimately their track record for doing what they say they’re going to do. Do they under promise and over deliver? Do they over promise and under deliver? Do they say what they’re going to do? Do they admit mistakes? Do they build great teams? Do people want to come work for them? Are they able to retain their talent?
And then part of it is how much are they running the business for the benefit of the business? How much are they running the business for the benefit of themselves? And that’s the analysis you do.
But a great leader has great followership. Over the course of their career, they’ll have a team they’ve built that will come follow them into the next opportunity. But the key is really the top person matters enormously, and then it’s who they recruit. You recruit an A-plus leader and they’re going to recruit other A- type people. You recruit a B-leader, you’re not going to recruit any great talent beneath them.
I don’t think it’s something that… If you think about surviving the jungle, the lion shows up and everyone starts running, you run with them. That does not work well in markets. In fact, you generally have to do the opposite, right? When the lemmings are running over the cliff, that’s the time where you’re facing the other direction and you’re running the other direction, i.e, you’re stepping in, you’re buying stocks at really low prices. Buffett’s been great at that and great at teaching about what he calls temperament, which is this sort of emotional or unemotional quality that you need to be able to dispassionately look at the world and say, “Okay, is this a real risk? Are people overreacting?” People tend to get excited about investments when stocks are going up and they get depressed when they’re going down. And I think that’s just inherently human. You have to reverse that. You have to get excited when things get cheaper and you got to get concerned when things get more expensive.
Stocks can trade at any price in the short term. And if you know what a business is worth and you understand the management and you know it extremely well, it’s not nearly as… It doesn’t bother you when a stock price goes down or it has much less impact on you because again, as Mr. Graham said, the short term, the markets are voting machine. You have a bunch of lemmings voting one direction that’s concerning. But if it’s a great business, doesn’t have a lot of debt and people are going to just listen to more music next year than this year, you know you’re going to do well. So it’s a bit some combination of being personally secure and also just knowing what you own and over time you build callouses, I would say.
And you can own the greatest business in the world trading for a hundred dollars a share, and next moment it could be 50. So as long as you don’t borrow against securities, you own really high quality businesses and it’s not money that you need in the short term, then you can actually be thoughtful about it. And that is a huge advantage. The vast majority of investors, it seems tend to be the ones that panic and the downturns get over related and when markets are doing well.
So I would invest in things you can understand, that’s kind of a key. You like Chipotle, you understand why they’re successful. You can go there every week and you can monitor. Is anything changing? How’s Chicken al Pastor, is that a good upgrade from the basic chicken? The drink offering is improving. The store is clean. I think you should invest in companies you really understand, simple businesses where you can predict with a high degree of confidence what it’s going to look like over time. And if you do that in a not particularly concentrated fashion and you don’t borrow money against your securities, you’ll probably do much better than your typical mutual fund.
So our strategy is built upon finding great companies in some cases that have lost their way and then helping them succeed. And we can do that with ideas from outside the boardroom. Sometimes we take a seat on a board or more than one, and we work with the best management teams in the world to help these businesses succeed. So when I first went into this business, no one knew who we were and we didn’t have that much money. And so to influence what was to us a big company, we had to make a fair bit more noise, right? So we would buy a stake, we’d announce it publicly, we’d attempt to engage with management. The first activist investment we made at Pershing Square was Wendy’s. I couldn’t get the CEO to ever return my call. He didn’t return my call. Actually, in that case, our idea was Wendy’s owned a company called Tim Hortons, which was this coffee donut chain, and you could buy Wendy’s for basically $5 billion and they owned a hundred percent of Tim Hortons, which itself was worth more than 5 billion.
So you could literally buy Wendy’s, separate Tim Hortons and get Wendy’s for negative value. That seemed like a pretty good opportunity even though the business wasn’t doing that well. So we bought the stake, called the CEO, couldn’t get a meeting, nothing. So we hired actually Blackstone, which at that time had an investment bank and we hired them to do what’s called a fairness opinion of what Wendy’s would be worth if they followed our advice and they agreed to do it, paid them a fee for it. And then we mailed in a letter with a copy of the fairness opinion saying Wendy’s would basically be worth 80% more if they did what we said. And six weeks later they did what we said. So that’s activism, at least an early form of activism. With that kind of under our belt, we had a little more credibility and now we started to take things and stakes in companies.
The media would pay attention. So the media became kind of an important partner and some combination of shame, embarrassment and opportunity motivated management teams to do the right thing. And then beyond that, there’s certain steps you can take if management’s recalcitrant and the shareholders are on your side. But it’s a bit like running for office. You’ve got to get all the constituents to support you and your ideas. And if they support you and your ideas, you can overthrow, if you will, the board of a company. You bring in new talent and then take over the management of a business. And that’s the most extreme form of activism. So that’s kind of the early days, and what we did. And a lot of the early things that we did were, what we call sort of like investment banking activism where we’d go in and recommend something, a good investment bank would’ve recommended, and if they do it, we make a bunch of money.
And then we moved on to the next one. And then we realized an investment in a company called General Growth was the first time we took a board seat on a company. And there it was some financial restructuring and also an opportunity to improve the operations of the business, sit on the board of a company. And that was one of the best investments we ever made. And we said, “Okay, we can do more than just be an outside the boardroom investor and we can get involved in helping select the right management teams and helping guide the right management teams.” And then we’ve done that over years. And then I would say the last seven years we haven’t had to be an activist. An activist is generally someone who’s outside banging on the door trying to get in. We’re sort of built enough credibility that they open the door and they say, “Hey, Bill, what ideas do you have? So welcome. Would you like to join the board?”
We’re treated differently today than we were in the beginning. And that is… I would say some people might just call it being an engaged owner. And by the way, that’s the way investing was done in the Andrew Carnegie, JPMorgan days 150 years ago. You had these iconic business leaders that would own 20% of US steel, and when things would go wrong, they’d replace the board and the management and fix them. And over time, we went to a world where mutual funds were created in the 1920s, ’30s, index funds with Vanguard and others, and that all these controlling shareholders gave their stock to society or their children and multiple generations. And they were no longer controlling owners of businesses or very few. And that led to under performance and the opportunity for activists over time. And what activism has done, and I think we’ve helped lead this movement, is it restored the balance of power between the owners of the business and the management of the company. And that’s been a very good thing for the performance of the US stock market actually.
And the best businesses are forever assets and decisions you make now have impact three, four or five years from now, in order to make… And sometimes there are decisions we make that have the effect of reducing the earnings of a company in the short-term because in the long term it’s going to make the business much more valuable. But sometimes it’s hard to have that kind of credibility when you’re a new CEO of a company. So when you have a major owner that’s respected by other shareholders sitting on the board saying, “Hey, the CEO is doing the right thing and making this expensive investment in a new factory, we’re spending more money on R&D because we’re developing something that’s going to pay off over time.” That large owner on the board can help buy the time necessary for management to behave in a longer term way. And that’s, I think, good for all the shareholders.
It was pretty aggressive. As the value went up, he would borrow more and more against the assets and that helped the short-term results of the business. The problem was during the financial crisis, the market for what’s called CMBS, commercial mortgage backed securities basically shut. And the company, because its debt was relatively short term, had a lot of big maturities coming up that they had no ability to refinance. And the market said, “Oh, my god, the lenders are going to foreclose and the shareholders going to get wiped, the company’s going to go bankrupt, they’re going to get wiped out.” The stock went from $63 a share to 34 cents. And there was a family, the Bucksbaum Family owned I think about 25% of the company, and they had a 5 billion of stock that was worth 25 billion or something by the time, we bought a stake in the business.
And what interested me was I thought the assets were worth substantially more than the liabilities. The company had 27 billion of debt and had a hundred million dollars value of the equity down from 20 billion. Okay? And one that sort of an interesting place to start with a stock down 99%. But the fundamental drivers, the mall business are occupancy. How occupied are the malls, occupancy was up year-on-year between ’07 and ’08. Interestingly, net operating income, which is kind of a measure of cash flow from the malls, that was up year-on-year. So kind of the underlying fundamentals were doing fine. The only problem they had is they had billions of dollars of debt that they had to repay, they couldn’t repay. And if you kind of examine the bankruptcy code, it’s precisely designed for a situation like this where it’s this resting place you can go to restructure your business.
Now the problem was that every other company that had gone bankrupt, the shareholders got wiped out. And so the market’s seeing every previous example, the shareholders get wiped out. The assumption is this stock is going to go to zero. But that’s not what the bankruptcy code says. What the bankruptcy code says is that the value gets portioned based on value. And if you could prove to a judge that there was the assets worth more than a liabilities, then the shareholders actually get to keep their investment in the company. And that was the bet we made. And so we stepped into the market and we bought 25% of the company in the open market for… We had to pay up. It started out at 34 cents, I think there were 300 million shares. So it was at a hundred million dollars value by the time we were done. We paid an average of… We paid 60 million for 25% of the business, so about $240 million for the equity of the company.
And then we had to get on the board to convince the directors the thing to do. And the board was in complete panic, didn’t know what to do, spending a ton of money on advisors. And I was a shareholder activist four years into Pershing Square, and no one had any idea what we were doing. They thought we were crazy. Every day we’d go into the market and we’d buy this penny stock and we’d file what’s called a 13D, every 1% increase in our stake. And people just thought we were crazy. We’re buying stock in a company that’s going to go bankrupt. “Bill, you’re going to lose all your money. Run.” And I said, “Well, wait, bankruptcy code says that if it’s more asset value than liabilities, we should be fine.” And the key moment, if you’re looking for fun moments is there’s a woman named Maddie Bucksbaum who’s from the Bucksbaum family.
And her cousin John was chairman of the board, CEO of the company. And as she calls me after we disclose our stake in the company, she’s like, “Bill Ackman, I’m really glad to see you here.” And I met her like… I don’t think it was a date, but I kind of met her in a social context when I was like 25 or something. And she said, “Look, I’m really glad to see you here and if there’s anything I can do to help you, call me.” I said, “Sure.” We kept trying to get on the board of the company. They wouldn’t invite us on, couldn’t really run a proxy contest, not with a company going bankrupt. And their advisors actually were Goldman Sachs…
The bankruptcy system worked the way it should. I was in court all the time and the first meeting with the judge, the judge is like, “Look, this would never have happened were it not for a financial crisis.” And once the judge said that, I knew we were going to be fine, because the company had really not done anything fundamentally wrong, maybe a little too aggressive in how they borrowed money. And stock went from 34 cents to $31 a share. And actually fun little anecdote, we made a lot of people a lot of money who followed us into it. I got a lot of nice thank you notes, which you get on occasion in this business, believe it or not. And then one day I get a voicemail, this is when there was something called voicemail, probably a few years later. And it’s a guy with a very thick Jamaican accent leaving a message for Bill Ackman.
I return all my calls, called the guy back. I said, “Hi, it’s Bill Ackman. I’m just returning your call.” He says, “Oh, Mr. Ackman, thank you so much for calling me.” And I said, “Oh, how can I help?” He says, “I wanted to thank you.” I said, “What do you mean?” He said, “I saw you on CNBC a couple of years ago and you were talking about this general growth and the stock.” I said, “Where was the stock at the time?” He said, “It’s 60 cents or something like this. And I bought a lot of stock.” And I’m like, “Well, how much did you invest?” ” Oh, I invest all of my money in the company.” And he was a New York City taxi driver and he invested like $50,000 or something like this at 60 cents a share. And he was still holding it. And he went into retirement and he made 50 times his money. And those are the moments that you feel pretty good about investing.
And that one we did very well, but I missed the big opportunity and I suffered severe psychological torture every time I walked by Rockefeller Center because we knew more about that property, anyone else, but I knew less about deal making and didn’t have the resources, and I was 28 years old or 27. And they hired a better lawyer than we did, and they outsmarted us on that one in a way. I said, “Okay, I’m going to go hire this guy the next time round.”
And those rules have been changed very recently where the company now has to include really all the candidates and the materials they sent to shareholders and the shareholders pick the best ones. When we ran proxy contests in the past, that was not the case. And so you have to spend a lot of money, mostly mailing fees and all kinds of other legal and other expenses to let everyone know you’re running, like running a political campaign. And then you got to run around and meet with the big shareholders, fly around the country, explain your case to them, and then there’s a shareholder meeting. And if you get a majority of the votes, you get on.
They’ll sit on four boards, they collect a million, a million and a half dollars a year in director’s fees. If they get thrown off the board by the shareholders, that’s embarrassing obviously and it affects their ability to get on other boards. Again, incentives, as I said earlier, drive all human behavior. The incentives of directors, they want to preserve their board seats. Now the directors on board serve in various roles. The most vulnerable ones are ones who, for example, chair a compensation committee. And if they put in a bad plan or they overpaid management, they’re subject to attack by shareholders. But these contests are not dissimilar to political contests, where there’s mudslinging and the other side puts out false information about you and you have to respond and they’re spending the shareholders’ money, so they have sort of unlimited resources. And you’re spending your and your investors’ money, when you’re a small firm, finite resources. They can outspend you, they can sue you, they can try to jigger the mechanics in such a way that you’re going to lose. There’s some unfortunate stuff that’s happened in the past, some manipulative stuff.
And basically same country, same regions, the tracks weren’t that far apart. But it was a really important company and being on this board was like an honorary thing. And everyone on the board was an icon of Canada. The chairman of the Royal Bank of Canada, the head of the most important privately held grain company, an important collection of big time Canadian executives. Here we were, this is probably about 13 years ago, and still maybe a 44-year-old from New York, not a Canadian basically saying, “This is the worst run railroad North America.” And we bought 12% of the railroad at a really low price and we brought with us to our first meeting, the greatest railroader ever, a guy named Hunter Harrison who had turned around Canadian National. We’re like, “Okay, we’ve got a great asset. We’ve got the greatest railroad CEO of all time. He’s come out of retirement to step in and run the railroad.” And we brought him to the first meeting and they wouldn’t even meet with him, and they certainly weren’t going to consider hiring him. And that led us to a proxy contest.
And then I spoke to a guy who was one of the wealthiest guys in Canada who was on the board at one point in time. And he said, “Bill, I have an idea for you. There’s this woman, Rebecca McDonald, why don’t you give her a call?” And I called Rebecca and she was the first woman to take a company public in Canada as CEO. And she was an anti-establishment, not afraid to take on anything kind of person. And I called her, we had a great conversation and she was in the Dominican Republic at her house and I flew down to see her and she said, “Yeah, I’m all in.” And actually, once we got her, that enabled us to get others. And then we put together our slate and we had some pretty interesting dialogue with the company. They tried to embarrass us all the time.
And Hunter was incredible, and Paul Lau, other members of my team were super engaged. And Canadians are known to be nice, so one of the problems we had is shareholders would never tell management or the board that they were losing. It was not until the night before the meeting when the vote came in, that management realized that they lost. We got 99% of the vote. And they begged us to take a deal. They said, “Look, we’ll resign tonight so that we don’t have to come to the meeting tomorrow.” That’s how embarrassed they were. But that was kind of an interesting one.
It taught me for-profit solutions to problems are much better than nonprofits. And here you had kind of a blend. It was set up as a nonprofit, but I think they found the same thing. They couldn’t hire the talent they wanted without having a for-profit subsidiary. But the nonprofit entity, as I understand it, owns a big chunk of OpenAI, and the investors own a capped interest where their upside is capped and they don’t have representation on the board. And I think that was a setup for a problem, and that’s clearly what happened here.
And then they also shorted the other stocks that we owned. And so that Valiant loss led to an overall more than 30% loss in the value of our portfolio. The Valiant loss was real and was crystallized. We ended up selling the position taking that loss. Most of the other losses were what I would call mark to market losses that were temporary. But many people go out of business because as I mentioned before, large move in a price, if investors are redeeming or you have leverage can put you out of business. And if people assumed if we got put out of business, we’d have to sell everything or cover our short position, and that would make the losses even worse. Wall Street is kind of ruthless.
You have to delegate more. That was a contributor to the Valiant mistake. Now we lose a ton of money on Valiant. My ex-wife and I were talking about separating, getting divorced. I put that on hold because I didn’t want to make a decision in the middle of this crisis, and things just kept getting worse. We were also sued. When you lose a lot of money … we didn’t get sued by our investors, but we got sued by a shareholder because when the stock price goes down, shareholders sue. We’d done nothing wrong other than make a big mistake. So you have litigation, your investors are taking their money out. I’m in the middle of a divorce. The divorce starts to proceed. My ex-wife’s lawyer’s expectations of what my net worth was was about three times what it actually was, and it was going lower right in the middle of this. And I remember the lawyer saying, “Look, Bill, we’ve estimate your net worth at X, but don’t worry, we only want a third.” But X was 3X, so a third was 100%.
And then I had litigation. And actually never before publicly disclosed, and I’ll share it with you now. We had a public company that owned about a third of our portfolio that was call it, our version of Berkshire Hathaway. I tried to learn from Mr. Buffet over time, and it was so to speak, permanent capital. The problem with hedge funds is people can take their money out every quarter. What Buffet has is a company where if people want to take their money out, they sell the stock, but the money stays. We set up a similar structure in October of 2014, and then a year later, Valiant happens, and then a year later we’re in the middle of the mess and we’re still in the mess. By mid 2017, we’ve got litigation underway, and another activist investor, a firm called Elliot Associates, which is run by a guy named Paul Singer, took a big position in our public company that was the bulk of our capital, and they shorted all the stocks that we owned.
And they probably went long the short that we were short, and they were making a bet that we’d be forced to liquidate and then they would make money on … Our public company was trading at a discount to what all the securities were worth. They bought the public company, they shorted the securities, and then they came to see us to try to be activists and force us to liquidate and that sort of-
I did something I’d never done before. I talked about it before about that you don’t borrow money, but I borrowed money and I borrowed $300 million from JP Morgan in the middle of this mess. And I give JP Morgan enormous credit in seeing through it. And also I had been a good client over a long period of time, and it’s like it’s a handshake bank and they bet that I would succeed. And I took that money to buy enough stock in my public company that I could prevent an activist from taking over and I could effectively buy control of our little public company.
And I got that done, and that I knew was the moment, the turning point. And I resolved my divorce, and divorces get easier to resolve when things are going badly. I was able to resolve that. We settled the litigation. I was buying blocks of our stock in the market. I remember a day I bought a big block of stock in the market, and I get a call from Gordon Singer, who is Paul Singer’s son, who runs their London part of their business. And he’s like, “Bill, was that you buying that block?” I said, “Yes.” And he’s like, “Fuck.”
But you just, okay, just make step by step by step. And then 90 days in you’re like, okay, I was way down there. Okay, the mountain. Okay, I don’t look up. Just keep making progress, progress, progress and progress really does compound. And one day you wake up and like, wow, it’s amazing how far I’ve come.
And if you look at a chart of Pershing Square, our company, you can see the absolute bottom. You can see where we were, you can see the drop and you can see where we are now. And that huge drop that felt like a complete unbelievable disaster looks like a little bump on the curve. And it really gives you perspective on these things. You just have to power through. And I think the key is, I’ve always been fortunate from a mental health point of view and nutrition, sleep, exercise, and a little progress every day. That’s it. And good friends and family. I had go take a walk with a friend every night and a sister who loves me and parents who were supportive, but they were all worried about their son, their brother. It was a moment.
And also, by the way, the other thing to think about is when you recover from something like this, you really appreciate it. And also as much of the media loves when some successful person falls, they love writing the story of success, they love even more the story of failure. But when you recover from that, it’s kind of like the American story. America, you think of the great entrepreneurs and how many failures they had before they succeeded. How many rocket launches did SpaceX have explode on the pad? And then you look at success. I mean, that’s why Musk is so admired.
He’s like, “Sure, but what are you going to pay me to borrow them?” I’m like, “I’ll pay you interest on the value of the dollars today.” So you borrow the dollars that are worth $100 each today, you pay them interest while you’re borrowing them, and then you go sell them in the market for $100. That’s what they’re worth. And then they go down in price to 50. You go back in, you buy the silver dollars back at $50 and you give them back to your friend. Your friend is fine. You borrowed 10, you gave him the 10 back and he got interest. In the meantime, he’s happy. He made money on his coin collection. You, however, made $50 times the 10 coins, you made 500 bucks. That’s pretty good. The problem with that is what if you sell them and they go from 100 to 1000, now you’re going to have to go buy them back and you got to pay whatever, $10,000 to buy back coins that you sold for 500.
You’re going to lose $9,500. And there’s no limit to how high a stock price can go. Companies go to $3 trillion in value. Tesla, a lot of people shorted Tesla saying, oh, it’s overvalued. He’s never going to be able to make a successful electric car. Well, I’m sure the people went bankrupt shorting Tesla. That’s why we didn’t short stocks. But I was presented with this actually a reporter that covered the other short investment we made early in the career, a company called MBIA, came to me and said, “Bill, I found this incredible company. You got to take a look at it. It’s a total fraud and they’re scamming poor people.”
And the people that adopt it lose money and they go after poor people. They go after, actually in many cases, undocumented immigrants who are pitched on the American Dream opportunity. And because they have few other options because they can’t get legal employment, they become Herbalife distributors. And it’s a business where you, so-called multi-level marketing. Multi-level marketing is sort of the name for a legitimate company like this. Or it’s a pyramid scheme where basically your sales are really only coming from people you convince to buy the product by getting them into the business. That’s precisely what this company is. And like, okay, shorting a pyramid scheme seems like, one, we’ll make a bunch of money, but two, the world will be behind us because they’re harming poor people. Regulators will get interested in a company like this. And we said, the FTC is going to shut this thing down.
And we did a ton of work and I gave this sort of epic presentation laying out all the facts, stock got completely crushed, and we were on our way. And the government actually got interested early on, launched an investigation pretty early, SEC and otherwise. But then a guy named Carl Icahn showed up, and we have a little bit of a backstory, but his motivations here were not really principally driven by thinking Herbalife was a good company. He thought it was a good way to hurt me. So he basically bought a bunch of stock and said it was a really great company, and Carl, at least at the time, threw his weight around a bit. He was a credible investor, had a lot of resources, and that began the saga.
And the way the schmuck insurance went, he said, “Look, Bill, if I sell the stock in the next three years for a higher price, I’ll give you 50% of my profit.” That’s a pretty good deal. So we made that deal, and because I was dealing with Carl Icahn who had a reputation for being difficult, I was very focused on the agreement and we didn’t want him to be able to be cute. So the agreement said, if he sells or otherwise transfers his shares. And we came up with a definition to include every version of sell, okay, because it’s Carl. Well, he then buys the stake and then makes a bid for the company and plan is for him to get the company. And he bids like 120 a share, and the company hires Morgan Stanley to sell itself, and he raises bid to 125 and then 130, and eventually gets sold, I don’t remember the exact price, let’s say $145 a share.
And Carl’s not the winning bidder, and he sells his stock or he loses or transfers his shares for $145 a share. So he owes actually our investors the difference between 145 and 80 times 50%. And I had… Lawyers never like you to put a arithmetic example. I put a formula out of a math book in the documents so there can be no confusion. It was only an eight page, really simple agreement. So the deal closes and he’s supposed to pay us in two business days or three business days. I wait a few business days, no money comes in. I call Carl. I’m like, “Carl, congratulations on the Hallwood Realty.” “Thanks Bill.” I said, “Carl, just I want to remind you, I know it’s been a few years, but we have this agreement. Remember the schmuck insurance?” He’s like, “Yeah.” And I said, “Well, you owe us our schmuck insurance.”
He said, “What do you mean? I didn’t sell my shares.” And I said, “Do you still have the shares?” He says, “No.” I said, “What happened to them?” “Well, the company did a merger for cash and they took away my shares, but I didn’t sell them. Do you understand what happened?” And I said, “Carl, I’m going to have to sue you.” He said, “Sue me. I’m going to sue you,” he says.
So I sued him and the legal system in America can take some time. And what he would do is we sued and then we won in the whatever New York Supreme Court, and then he appealed, and you can appeal six months after the case. He waited till the 179th day, and then he would appeal. And then we fought at the next level, and then he would appeal. And he appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. Of course, the Supreme Court wouldn’t take the case. It took years. Now, as part of our agreement, we got 9% interest on the money that he owed us. So I viewed it as my Carl Icahn money market account with a much higher interest rate. And eventually I won.
I met a professor from Berkeley a couple of years ago who told me that he had been hired by the government as their expert on Herbalife, and he got access to all their data, was able to prove that they’re a pyramid scheme. But the government ultimately settled with Carl because they were afraid they could possibly lose in court. So they settled with him. But if you look at the stock, if we’d been able to stay short the entire time, we would’ve made a bunch of money because the stock had a $6 billion market cap, and we shorted it. Today as probably a billion, a billion and a half.
And so I had kind of an early kind of perspective, and as chairman of the Jerusalem Foundation, I would go into Arab communities and I would meet with families in their homes. You get a sense of the humanity of a people. And I care about humanity. I generally take the side of people who’ve been disadvantaged. Almost all of our philanthropic work has been in that capacity. So it’s sort of my natural perspective, but I don’t take the side of terrorists ever, obviously. And the whole thing is just a tragedy.
And then going back to incentives, terrorists generate their resources by committing terrorism, and that’s how they get funding. And there’s a lot of graft. It’s a plutocracy. The top of the terrorist pyramid, if you accept the numbers that are in the press, the top leaders have billions of dollars. 40 billion or so has gone into Gaza over the last… and the West Bank over the last 30 years, a number like that. And a lot of it’s disappeared into some combination of corruption or tunnels or weapons. And the tragedy is you look at what Singapore has achieved in the last 30 years, right?
Then the protests erupted on campus and they started out reasonably benign. Then the protesters got more and more aggressive in terms of violating university rules on things like bullying, and the university did nothing. That obviously for the Jewish students, the Israeli students, the Israeli faculty, Jewish faculty, created an incredibly uncomfortable environment. The president seemed indifferent. I went up to campus and I met with hundreds of students in small groups, in larger groups and they’re like, “Bill, why is the president doing nothing? Why is the administration doing nothing?” That was really the beginning.
I reached out to the president, reached out to the board of Harvard, I said, “Look, this thing is headed in the wrong direction and you need to fix it. I have some ideas, love to share.” I got the Heisman, as they say. They just kept pushing off the opportunity for me to meet with the president and meet with the board. At a certain point in time I pushed, I’m kind of a activist when he pushed me, it reminded me of early days of activism where I couldn’t get the CEO of Wendy’s to return my call. I couldn’t get the CEO of Harvard to take a meeting.
Then finally I spoke to the chairman of the board, a woman by the name of Penny Pritzker, who I’m on a business school board with her. It was, as I described, one of the more disappointing conversations in my life. She seemed a bit like, if you will, deer in the headlights. They couldn’t do this, they couldn’t do that. The law was preventing them from doing various things. That led to my first letter to the university. I sort of ended the letter of giving this president of Harvard a dare to be great speech. This is your opportunity. You can fix this. This could be your legacy. I emailed it to the president and the board members whose email addresses I had, I posted it on Twitter and I got no response, no acknowledgement, nothing. In fact, the open dialogue I had with a couple of people on the board basically got shut down after that.
That led to letter number two. Then when the Congress, led by Elise Stefanik, announced an investigation of antisemitism on campus and concern about violations of law, the president was called to testify along with two other … The president of MIT, the president of University of Pennsylvania were having similar issues on campus. I reached out to the president of Harvard and said, well, one, the Israeli government had gotten in touch and offered the opportunity for me to see the Hamas, if you will, GoPro film. I said, “You know, I’d love to show it at Harvard,” and they thought that would be a great idea. I partnered with the head of Harvard Chabad, a guy named Rabbi Hirschy, and we were putting the film up on campus.
I thought if the president were to see this, it would give her a lot of perspective on what happened and she should see it before her testimony. I reached out to her, or actually Rabbi Hirschy did. He was told she would be out of town and couldn’t see it. Then I reached out to her again and said, “Look, I’ll facilitate your attendance in the Congress. Come see the film, I’ll fly you down.” That was rejected, and then she testified.
I watched a good percentage, 80% of the testimony, of all three presidents, and it was an embarrassment to the country, embarrassment to the universities. They were evasive. They didn’t answer questions. They were rude. They smirked. They looked very disrespectful to our Congress. Then, of course, there was that several minutes where finally Elise Stefanik was not getting answers to her questions, and she said, “Let me be kind of clear. What if protestors were calling for genocide for the Jews? Does that violate your rules on bullying and harassment?” The three of them basically gave the same answer; “It depends on the context.” Not until they actually executed on the genocide that the university had the right to intervene.
The thing that perhaps bothered me the most was the incredible hypocrisy. Each of these universities are ranked by this entity called FIRE, which is a nonprofit that focuses on free speech on campus. Harvard, it’s been in the bottom quartile for the last five years and dropped to last before October 7th, out of 250.
I was in the barber chair, if you will, getting a haircut. I had a guy on my team send me the three-minute section. I said, “Cut that line of questioning.” I put out a little tweet on that. I call it my greatest hits of posts, it’s got something like 110 million views. Everyone looked at this and said, “What is wrong with university campuses and their leadership,” and their governance, by the way. In a way, this whole conversation has been about governance. Harvard has a disastrous governance structure, which is why we have the problem we have.
After the congressional testimony, the board of Harvard said that they were unanimously, a hundred percent behind President Gay. Clearly, I was ineffective. Ultimately what took her down was other, I would say, activists who identified issues with academic integrity and then she lost the confidence of the faculty. Once that happens, it’s hard to stay. I wanted her to be fired, basically, or be forced to resign because of failures of leadership, because that would’ve sent a message about the importance of leadership. Failure to stop a emergence of antisemitism on campus. There’s some news today; the protests are getting worse.
Harvard is a private corporation and as a private corporation, they can put on what restrictions they want. Harvard had introduced only a few months before bullying and harassment policies, and that’s why Representative Stefanik focused on … It’s not like she said, “Does calling for genocide against the Jews violate your free speech policies?” She said, “Does calling for genocide against the Jews violate your policies on bullying and harassment?”
I think everyone looked at this when they said, it depends on the context. They said, look, if you replaced Jews with some other ethnic group, students who’ve used the N word for example, have been thrown off campus or suspended. Students who’ve hate speeched directed at LGBTQ people has led to disciplinary action, but attacking, spitting on Jewish students or roughing them up a bit, seemed like we’re calling for their elimination, didn’t seem to violate the policies. Look, I think a university should be a place where you have broad views and open viewpoints and broad discussion, but it should also be a place where students don’t feel threatened going to class, where their learning is not interrupted, when final exams are not interrupted by people coming in with loud protests.
Students asked me when I went up there, “What would you do if you were Harvard president?” This was before I knew what was happening on the Dartmouth campus, I said, “I’d convene everyone together. This is Harvard. We have access to the best minds in the world. Let’s have a better understanding of the history. Let’s understand the backdrop. Let’s focus on solutions. Let’s bring Arab and Jewish and Israeli students together. Let’s form let groups to create communication.” That’s how you solve this kind of problem. None of that stuff has been done. It’s not that hard.
Then there’s the board of overseers, which is I think 32 directors. A few years ago, if you could put together 600 signatures, you could run for that board and put up a bunch of candidates and about five or six get elected each year. A group did exactly that, and it was an oil and gas kind of disinvestment group. They got the signatures, a couple of them got elected, and Harvard then changed the rules and they said, ” Now we need 3,200 signatures. By the way, if there are these dissident directors on the board, we’re going to cap them at five.” So if three were elected in the oil and gas thing, now they’re only two seats available.
Then a group of former students, kind of younger alums, one of whom I knew, approached me and said, “Look, Bill, we should run for the board.” They decided this pretty late, only a few weeks before the signatures were due. We’d love your support. I took a look at their platform, I thought it looked great. I said, “Look, happy to support.” I posted about them, did a Zoom with them, and they got thousands of signatures. Collectively the four got, whatever, 12,000 signatures or something like this. They missed by about 10% of the threshold.
What did Harvard do in the middle of the election? They made it very, very difficult to sign up for a vote and it just makes them look terrible. They’ve got now thousands of alums upset that … Again, this wasn’t an election. This was just to put the names on the slate. The only candidates on the slate are the ones selected by the existing members. Businesses fail because of governance failures. Universities fail because of governance failures. It’s not really the president’s fault, because the job of the board is to hire and fire the president and help guide the institution academically and otherwise. That’s governance.
I was like, “How can this be?” October 7th, the event that woke me up was 30 student organizations came out with a public letter on October 8th, literally the morning after this letter was created and said, “Israel is solely responsible for Hamas’ violent acts.” Again, Israel had not even mounted a defense at this point, and there were still terrorists running around in the southern part of Israel. I’m like, “34 Harvard student organizations signed this letter?” I’m like, “What is going on? WTF?” That’s when I went up on campus and I started talking to the faculty.
That’s when I started hearing about, actually, Bill, it’s this DEI ideology. I’m like, “What?” Diversity, equity, inclusion. Obviously I’m familiar with these words and I see this in the corporate context. They say, “Yeah.” They started talking to me about this oppressor-oppressed framework, which is effectively taught on campus and represents the backdrop for many of the courses that are offered and some of the studies and other degree offerings. I had not even heard of this and I’m a pretty aware person, but I was completely unaware. Basically they’re like, “Look, Israel is deemed an oppressor and the Palestinians are deemed the oppressed, and you take the side of the oppressed. Any acts of the oppressed to dislodge the oppressor, regardless of how vile or barbaric, are okay.” I’m like, “Okay. This is a super dangerous ideology.”
I wrote a questioning post about this, like, “Here’s what I’m hearing, is this right?” A friend of mine sent me Christopher Rufo’s book, America’s Cultural Revolution, which is sort of a sociological study of the origins of the DEI movement and critical race theory. I found it actually one of the more important books I’ve read and also I found it quite concerning. Ultimately, DEI comes out of a kind of Marxist socialist way to look at the world. I think there are a lot of issues with it, but unfortunately it’s advancing. I, ultimately, concluded racism, as opposed to fighting it, which is what I thought it was ultimately about.
Harvard faculty were telling me that there really is no such thing as free speech on campus and that there was a survey done, a year or so ago, the Harvard faculty and only 2% of the faculty admitted, even in an anonymous survey, admitted to having a conservative point of view. We have a campus that’s 98% non-conservative, liberal, progressive that’s adopted this DEI construct. Then I learned from a member of the search committee for the Harvard president that they were restricted in looking at candidates only those who met the DEI office’s criteria. I shared this in one of my postings and I was accused of being a racist. That’s someone who believes in that diversity is a very good thing for organizations and that equity fairness isn’t really important, and having an inclusive culture is critical for a functioning of a organization. Here I was, someone who was like, “Okay. DEI, sounds good to me,” at least in the small D small E, I version of events, but this DEI ideology is really problematic.
I described it as almost a McCarthy-esque kind of movement in that if you challenge the DEI construct people accuse you of being a racist. It’s happened to me already. Perhaps I’m much less vulnerable than a university professor who can get shouted off campus, canceled. I’m sort of difficult to cancel, but that doesn’t mean people aren’t going to try. I’ve been the victim of a couple of interesting articles in the last few days, or at least one in particular in The Washington Post written by what I thought was a well-meaning reporter. It’s just clear that I’ve taken on some big parts of at least the progressive establishment, DEI. I’m also a believer that Biden should have stepped aside a long time ago, and it’s only getting worse. I’m attacking the president, DEI, elite universities and you make some enemies doing that.
I wrote my college thesis on university admissions. The reason why controlling the gates of the Harvard institution, the admissions office is important, is that many of these people who graduate end up with the top jobs in government and ultimately become judges, they permeate through society and so it really matters what they learn. If they’re limited to one side of the political aisle and they’re not open to a broad array of views, and this represents some of the most elite institutions in our country, I think it’s very problematic for the country, long term.
One of the things I learned about how faculty get hired at universities, ultimately, it’s signed off by the board, but the new faculty are chosen by each of the various departments. There’s sort of a tipping point, politically, where once they tip in one direction, the faculty recruit more people like themselves. The departments become more and more progressive, if you will, with the passage of time. They only advance candidates that meet their political objectives. It’s not a great way to build an institution, which allows for …
Really, plagiarism is academic fraud. One indicia of plagiarism is a missing footnote, that could also be a clerical error. When a professor’s accused of plagiarism, the university does sort of a deep dive. They have these administrative boards. It can take six months, nine months, a year to evaluate … Intent matters. Was this intentional theft of another person’s idea? That’s academic fraud. Or was this sloppy or just humanity? You miss a footnote here or there. I think once it got …
Now if you’re writing a novel, words matter more. If you’re taking Shakespeare and presenting it as your own words. If you’re writing about ideas, ideas matter, but you’re not supposed to take someone else’s words without properly acknowledging them, whether it’s quotation marks or otherwise.
But in the context of a academic’s life’s work before AI, everyone’s going to have missing quotation marks and footnotes. I remember writing my own thesis, there were books you couldn’t take out a Widener Library, so I’d have index cards. And I’d write stuff on index cards, and I put a little citation to make sure I remember to cite it properly.
And scrambling to do your thesis, get it in on time, what’s the chances you forget at what point, what are your words versus the author’s words? And you forget to put quotation marks. Just the humanity, the human fallibility of it. So it’s not academic fraud to have human fallibility, but it’s academic fraud. If you take someone else’s ideas that are an integral part of your work.
I mean, the future of Harvard, A lot of it’s going to depend on who they pick as the next leader. Here’s an interesting anecdote that I think has not surfaced publicly. So a guy named Larry Bacow was the previous president of Harvard. Larry Bacow was on the search committee, and they were looking for a new president. And what was strange was they picked an old white guy to be president of Harvard when there was a call for a more diverse president.
And what I learned was Harvard actually ran a process, had a diverse new president of Harvard, and in the due diligence on that candidate, shortly before the announcement of the new president, they found out that that presidential candidate had a plagiarism problem. And the search had gone on long enough, they couldn’t restart a search to find another candidate.
So they picked Larry Bacow off the board, off the search committee to the next president Harvard, as kind of an interim solution. And then there was that much more pressure to have a more diverse candidate this time around, because it was a big disappointment to the DEI office, if you will, and I would say to the community at large. That Harvard of all places couldn’t have a racially-diverse present. It sent an important message.
So the strange thing is that they didn’t do due diligence on President Gay, and that it was a relatively quick process. So the whole thing I think is worthy of further exploration.
And the incentives in some sense of the alums are for, it’s a bit like a club. If you’re proud of the elitism of the club, you don’t want that many new members. But the fact that the population has grown of the country so significantly since, certainly, I was a student in 1984, and the fact that Harvard recruits people from all over the world, it’s really serving a smaller and smaller percentage of the population today.
And some of them were most talented and successful entrepreneurs anyway. It’s a token of success that they didn’t make it through their undergraduate years. They left as a freshman, or they didn’t attend at all.
But I mean what I say. She’s the most remarkable person I’ve ever met, and I’ve met a lot of remarkable people, and I’m incredibly fortunate to spend a very high percentage of my lifetime with her, ever since I met her six years ago.
I met her parents for the first time a long time ago, almost six years ago as well. And I knew her parents were from Eastern Europe, originally. So I asked her father, what city did her family come from originally? And I called my father and asked him, “Dad, Grandpa Abraham, what’s the name of the city?” And then I put the two cities into Google Maps, and they were 52 miles apart. Which I thought was pretty cool.
Then of course at some point we did genetic testing, make sure we weren’t related, which we were not. But we share incredible commonality on values. We are attracted to the same kind of people. She loves my friends, I love hers. We love doing the same kind of things, we like spending time the same ways.
And she has more emotion, more elegance. She doesn’t like battles, but she’s very strong. But she’s more sensitive than I am.
So I shared, I reposted those posts. And then when the board, she ultimately resigned and she got a $900,000 a year professorship continuing at Harvard, I said, look, in light of her limited academic record and these plagiarism allegations, she had to go.
I knew when I did so, I assumed I was actually a bit paranoid about that thesis I had written. I only had one academic work, but I hadn’t checked it for plagiarism. And I thought, that’s going to happen. Actually, I had someone, I did not have a copy on hand, so I got a copy of my thesis.
And I remember writing it, Harvard at the time was pretty, they kind of gave you a lecture about making sure you have all your footnotes and quotation marks. I learned later that apparently they had a copy of my thesis at the New York Public Library, and a member of the media told me he was there online with a dozen other members of the media all trying to get a copy of my thesis to run it through some AI. They had to first do optical character recognition to convert the paper document into digital.
But fortunately, through a miracle, I didn’t have an issue. I didn’t think about Neri of course, who has whatever, 130 academic works.
And so we were just at the end of a vacation for Christmas break, and it was early in the morning for a vacation time. And all of a sudden I hear my phone ringing in the other room, or vibrating in the other room multiple times. I’m like, hm.
I pick up the phone and saw our communication guy, Fran McGill. And he’s like, “Bill, Business Insider has apparently identified a number of instances of plagiarism in Neri’s dissertation. Let me send you this email.”
He sent me the email, and they had identified four paragraphs in her 330- page dissertation where she had cited the author, but she had used the vast majority of the words, and that those paragraphs were from the author, and she should have used quotation marks.
And then there was one case where she paraphrased correctly an author, but did not footnote that it was from his work.
And so we were presented with this and told, they’re going to publish in a few hours. And we’re like, “Well, can we get to the next day? We’re just about to head home.”
And they’re like, “No, we’re publishing by noon. We need an answer by noon.”
And so we downloaded the copy of her thesis on the slow internet. And Neri checked it out and she said, “You know what? Looks like they’re right.”
And I said, “Look, you should just admit your mistake.”
And she wrote a very simple, gracious, yes, I should have used quotation marks. And on the author I failed to cite, she pointed out that she cited them eight other times, and wrote a several-paragraph section of her thesis acknowledging his work.
And none of these were important parts of her thesis. But she acknowledged her mistake and she said, I apologize for my mistake, and I apologized to the author who I failed to cite. And I stand on the shoulders of all the people came before me, and looking to advance work. And we sort of thought it was over.
We head home. In-flight on the way home, although we didn’t realize this until we got back the following day, a Business Insider published another article and said, “Neri Oxman admits to plagiarism.” Plagiarism, of course, is academic fraud. And this thing goes crazy viral.
Oh, Bill Ackman the title is Bill Ackman’s Wife, Celebrity Academic, Mary Oxman. And they use the term celebrity because there are limits to what legitimate media can go after, but celebrities, there’s a lot more leeway in the media into what they can say. So that’s why they call her a celebrity. First time ever she’d been called a celebrity. And they basically, she’s admitting to academic fraud. And then they said … And then the next day at 5:19 PM, I remember the timeline pretty well, an email was sent to Fran McGill saying, “We’ve identified two dozen other instances of plagiarism in her work.” 15 of which are Wikipedia entries where she copied definitions, and the others were mostly software-hardware manuals for various devices or software she used in her work, most of which were in footnotes where she described a nozzle for a 3D printer or something like this.
And they said, “We’re publishing tonight.” The email they sent to us was 6,900 words. It was 12 pages. It was practically indecipherable. You couldn’t even read it in an hour. And we didn’t have some of the documents they were referring to.
And I’m like, “Neri, you know what I’m going to do? I think it’ll be useful to provide context here. I’m going to do a review of every MIT professor’s dissertations. Every published paper. AI has enabled this.”
And so that was, I put out a tweet basically saying that. And we’re doing a test run now, because we have to get it right, and I think it’ll be a useful exercise. Provide some context, if you will. And then this thing goes crazy viral. And Neri is a pretty sensitive person, pretty emotional person, and someone who’s a perfectionist. And having everyone in the world thinking you committed academic fraud is a pretty damning thing.
Now, they did say they did a thorough review of all of her work, and this is what they found. I’m like, sweetheart, that’s remarkable. I did 130 works, 73 of which were peer-reviewed, blah, blah, blah. And she’s published in Nature Science and all these different publications. That’s actually, it’s a pretty good batting average.
But this is wrong, this is not academic fraud. These are inadvertent mistakes. And the Wikipedia entries, Neri actually used Wikipedia as a dictionary. This is the early days of Wikipedia. And they also referred to the MIT handbook, which has a whole section on plagiarism, academic handbook.
And if you read it, which I ultimately did, they make clear a few things. Number one, there’s plagiarism, academic fraud. And there’s what they call inadvertent plagiarism, which is clerical errors where you make a mistake, and it depends on intent. And there’s a link that you can go to, which is a section on, if you get investigated at MIT, what happens? What’s the procedure, what’s the initial stage, what’s the investigative stage, what’s the procedure if they identify it? And they make very clear that academic fraud is, and they list plagiarism, research theft, a few other things, but it does not include honest errors. Honest errors are not plagiarism under MIT’s own policies.
And in the handbook, they also have a big section of what they call common knowledge. And common knowledge depends on who you’re writing your thesis for. And so if it’s a fact that is known by your audience, you’re not required to quote or cite.
And so all those Wikipedia entries were for things like sustainable design, computer-aided design. She just took a definition from Wikipedia, common knowledge to her readers, no obligation under the handbook, totally exempt.
On using the same words, she referred to whatever, some kind of 3D printer. She was, the Stratasys 3D Printer, and she quoted from the manual. Right away, Stratasys is a company you consulted for. That’s not something, you’re not stealing their ideas, you’re describing a nozzle for a device you use in your work in a footnote. That’s not a theft of idea.
And so I’m like, this is crazy. And so this has got to stop. And so I reach out to a guy I knew who was on the board of Business Insider, the chairman, and his name is going to come public shortly. I committed at that time to keep his name confidential, it’s now surfaced publicly in the press.
And there’s nothing about anything that Neri did, anything in her thesis or in her life. Everyone that knows her, she’s a rock star. I just want to make it clear, it really hurt me that the internet, whatever is happening, could go after a great scientist. Because I love science, and I love celebrating great scientists.
And it’s just really messed up that whatever the machine, we can talk about Business Insider or whatever, social media, mass hysteria, whatever is happening. We need the great scientists of the world, because the future depends on them. And so we need to celebrate them, and protect them, and let them flourish and do their thing.
And keep them out of this whatever shit-storm that we’re doing to get clicks, and advertisements, and drama and all this. We need to protect them. So I just want to say there’s nobody I know, and I have a million friends that are scientists, world-class scientists, Nobel Prize winners, they all love Neri, they all respect Neri, she did zero wrong.
And then the rest of the conversation we’re going to have about how broken journalism is, and so on. But I just want to say that there’s nothing that Neri did wrong. It’s not a gray area or so on.
I also personally don’t love that Claudine Gay is a discussion about plagiarism, because it distracts from the fundamentals that is broken, it becomes some weird technical discussion. But in case of Neri, did nothing wrong. Great scientist, great engineer at MIT and beyond. She’s doing the cool thing now.
It’s not just that she did nothing wrong, but they accused her of academic fraud. They did it knowing, they make reference to MIT’s own handbook so they had to read all the same stuff that I read in the handbook, they did that work. Then, after I escalated this thing to Henry Blodget, the chairman of Business Insider, to the CEO of Axel Springer, I even reached out to Henry Kravis at a certain point in time, one of the controlling shareholders of the company through KKR, laying out the factual errors in the article.
Business Insider went public after they said Neri committed academic fraud and plagiarism. And said, we didn’t challenge any, the facts remain undisputed in the article.
So it’s basically, Neri committed plagiarism. That’s story one. Neri admits to plagiarism. She admits to plagiarism. She admitted to making a few clerical errors, that’s the only thing she admitted to, and she graciously apologized.
So they said, “Neri admits to plagiarism, apologizes for plagiarism.” That’s incredibly damning. ” And by the way, we’re doing an investigation because we’re concerned that there might’ve been inappropriate process, but the facts of the story have not been disputed by Neri Oxman or Bill Ackman.”
And that was totally false. I had done it privately, I’d done it publicly on Twitter, on X. I laid out, I have a whole tech stream, a WhatsApp stream with the CEO of the company. And they doubled down, and they doubled down again.
And so, I don’t sue people lightly. And stay tuned.
And I’m just making sure that when we present the demand to Business Insider, and ultimately to Axel Springer, that it’s incredibly clear how they defamed her, the factual mistakes in our stories, and what they need to do to fix it. And if we can fix it there, we can move on from this episode and hopefully avoid litigation. So that’s where we are.
It was a political agenda. She doesn’t like me, and she was trying to hurt me, and they couldn’t find plagiarism in my thesis. And being a short seller, the Herbalife battle went on for years. They tried to do everything to destroy my reputation. So they’d already gone through my trash, they’d already done all that work. So anything they could possibly find, I’ve always lived a very clean life, thankfully. And if you’re going to be an activist short seller, you better. Because they’re going to find out dirt on you if it exists. And so they’re like, how can we really hurt Bill?
And by the way, Neri had left MIT years earlier. When the reporter found out she was no longer a member of the MIT faculty, they were enraged. They didn’t believe us. They made us prove to us she’s no longer on the MIT faculty, because they wanted to get her fired. And by the way, malice is one of the important factors in determining whether defamation is taking place. And this was a malice- driven, this was not about news.
And the unfortunate thing about journalism is Business Insider made a fortune from this. This story was published and republished by thousands of media organizations around the world. It was the number one trending thing on Twitter for two days. Every newspaper, it was on the front page of every Israeli newspaper, it was on the front page of the Financial Times.
And she’s building a business. And if you’re a CEO of a science company and you committed academic fraud, that’s incredibly damaging. But I ultimately convinced her that this was good.
I said, “Sweetheart, you’re amazing. You’re incredible. You’re incredibly talented, but you’re mostly known in the design world. Now everyone in the universe has heard of Neri Oxman. We’re going to get this thing cleared up. You’re going to be doing an event in six months where you’re going to tell the world, you’re going to go out of stealth mode, you’re going to tell the world about all the incredible things that you’re building, and you’re designing, and you’re creating. And it’s going to be like the iPhone launch, because everyone’s going to be paying attention and they’re going to want to see your work.”
And that’s how I try to cheer her up. But I think it’s true.
And so she’s going to do amazing things. But as I said, she’s an extremely sensitive person. She’s a perfectionist. Okay? Imagine thinking that the entire world thinks you committed academic fraud. And so that was very hard for her.
She’s a very positive person. But I saw her in, I would say, her darkest emotional period for sure. She’s doing much better now. But you can kill someone. You can kill someone by destroying their reputation. People commit suicide. People go into these deep, dark depression.
When you went from a paper version of journalism to digital, and you could track how many people click, and it’s a medium that advertising drives the economics. And if you can show an advertiser more clicks, you can make more money. So a journalist is incentivized to write a story that will generate more clicks. How do you write a story that generate more clicks? You get a billionaire guy, and then you go after his wife, and you make a sensationalist story. And you give them no time to respond, right?
Look at the timing here. On the first story, they gave us three hours. On the second one, the following day, 5:19 PM, the email comes in not to Neri, not to her firm, but to my communications person. Who tracks us down by 5:30, 10 minutes later. And they publish their story 92 minutes after.
And they sent us, “We’re going to surface all these documents in our demand.” Read the email they sent, whether you could even decipher it. There was no … And by the way, there’s a reason why academic institutions, when a professor’s accused…
And the media plays a very important role and they can destroy people. At least we now have some ability to fight back. We have a platform, we can surface our views. The typical old days, they write an incredibly damning article and you point out factual errors and then two months later they bury a little correction on page, whatever. By then the person was fired where their life was destroyed or the reputation’s damaged. It was with Warren Buffett talking about media, and it’s a business he really loves. He says, “You know what, Bill?” He said, “A thief with a dagger. The only person who cause you more harm than a thief with a dagger is a journalist with a pen.” And those were very powerful words.
And he did a lot of things perhaps deserving of being discredited. He is by a very imperfect and some cases harmful leader. But everything from pre-election, the Hunter Biden laptop story in the New York Post that then Twitter made difficult for people to share and to read. COVID, the Jay Bhattacharyas of the world, questioning the government’s response, questioning long-term lockdowns, questioning keeping kids out of school, questions about masks, about vaccines, which are still not definitively answered, no counterbalance to the power of the government when the government can shut down avenues for free speech and where the mainstream media has kind of towed the line in many stents to the government’s actions.
So having an independently owned powerful platform is very important for truth, for free speech, for hearing the other side of the story, for counterbalancing the power of the government. Elon is getting a lot of pushback. The SpaceXs and Teslas of the world are experiencing a lot of government questions and investigations. And even the President of the United States came out and said, “Look, he needs to be investigated.” I’m getting my own version of that in terms of some negative media articles. I don’t know what’s next. But yeah, if you stick your neck out in today’s world and you go against the establishment, or at least the existing administration, you can find yourself in a very challenged place. And that discourages people from sharing stuff. And that’s why anonymous speech is important, some of which you find on Twitter.
And those conditions were present in 2020 as well. They’re just, I would say worse now. And I said, “Look, it’s a great thing that we have a business man as president.” And in my lifetime was really the first businessman as opposed to, I mean, maybe Bush to some degree was a business person, but I thought, “Okay, I always wanted the CEO to be CEO of America.” And now we have Trump said, “Look, he’s got some personal qualities that seem less ideal, but he’s going to be President of the United States. He’s going to rise to the occasion. This is going to be his legacy, and he knows how to make deals and he’s going to recruit some great people into his administration.” I hoped. And growth can solve a lot of our problems. So if we can get rid of a bunch of regulations that are holding back the country, we can have a president.
Obama was a, I would say not a pro-business president. He did not love the business community. He did not love successful people. And having a president who just changed the tone on being a pro-business president, I thought it would be good for the country. And that’s basically what I said. And I would say Trump did a lot of good things and a lot of people, you can get criticized for acknowledging that, but I think the country’s economy accelerated dramatically. And that, by the way, the capitalist system helps the people at the bottom best when the system does well and when the economy does well.
The black unemployment rate was the lowest in history when Trump was president, and that’s true for other minority groups. So he was good for the economy, and he recognized some of the challenges and issues and threats of China early. He kind of woke up NATO. Now, again, the way he did all this stuff you can object to, but NATO actually started spending more money on defense in the early part of Trump’s presidency because of his threats, which turned out to be a good thing in light of ultimately the Russia-Ukraine war. And I think if you analyze Trump objectively based on policies, he did a lot of good for the country. I think what’s bad is he did some harm as well.
I do think civility disappeared in America with Trump as president. A lot of that’s his personal style. And how important is civility? I do think he was attacked very aggressively by the left, by the media that made him paranoid. It probably interfered with his ability to be successful. He had the Russian collusion investigation overhang, and when someone’s attacked, they’re not going to be at their best, particularly if they’re paranoid. I think there’s some degree of that, but I’m giving the best of defense of Trump. Just you look at how he managed his team, right? Very few people made it through the Trump administration without getting fired or quitting, and he would say they’re the greatest person in the world when he hired them, and they’re total disaster when he fired them. It’s not an inspiring way to be a leader and to attract really talented people.
I think the events surrounding the election, I think January 6th, he could have done a lot more to stop a riot. I don’t consider it an insurrection, but a riot that takes place in our capitol. And where police officers are killed or die, commit suicide for failure as they sought it to do their job. He stepped in way too late to stop that. He could have stopped it early. Many of his words, I think, inspired people, some of whom with malintent to go in there and cause harm, and literally to shut down the government. There were some evil people unfortunately there. So he’s been a very imperfect president and also I think contributed to the extreme amount of divisiveness in our country. So I was ultimately disappointed by the note of optimism. And again, I always support the president. I trust the people ultimately to select our next leader.
It’s a bit like who wants to be a millionaire? When you go to the crowd and the crowd says a certain thing, you got to trust the crowd. But usually in who wants to be a millionaire, it’s a landslide in one direction. So you know which letter to pick. Here, we had an incredibly close election, which itself is a problem. So my dream and what I’ve tried a little bit, played politics in the last little period to support some alternatives to Trump so that we have a president. I use the example, imagine you woke up in the morning, it’s election day, whatever it is, this November 4th, whatever, 2024, and you still haven’t figured out who to vote for because the candidates are so appealing that you don’t know which lever to pull because it’s a tough call. That’s the choice we should be making as Americans. It shouldn’t be, I’m a member of this party and I’m only going to vote this way. I’m a member of that party going to vote the other way and I hate the other side. And that’s where we’ve been, unfortunately for too long.
He’s not a billionaire, but he doesn’t need the job. The party hates him now because he challenged the king, but he was willing to give up his political career because what he thought was best for the country, he tried to get other people to run who were higher profile, had more name recognition. None would, no one wants to challenge Biden if they want to have a chance to stay in office or run in the future. But he’s very principled. I think he would be a great president, but his shot is Michigan, but he needs to raise money in order to… He’s only got a couple weeks and he’s got to be on TV there. That’s expensive. So we’ll see.
I mean, you got to be at the serious physical shape and at the top of your game to represent this country. And he is a far cry from that. And it’s just getting worse, and it’s embarrassing. And he cannot be. And by the way, every day he waits, he’s handing the election to Trump because it’s harder and harder for an alternative candidate to surface. Now, Dean is the only candidate left on the Democratic side. They can still win delegates. He’s on the ballot in 42 states. And the best way for Biden to step aside is for Dean to show well in Michigan.
Haley, who I like and who I’ve supported, does not look like she’s going to make it. Trump is really kind of running the table. And so vote for Haley as an independent Michigan, maybe throw away your vote. I think it increases the likelihood that Dean can get those independent votes if he could theoretically, again, he needs money, he could beat Biden in Michigan. Biden’s doing very poorly in Michigan. His polls are terrible. The Muslim community is not happy with him, and he really has spent no time there. And so if he’s embarrassed in Michigan, it could be a catalyst for him withdrawing.
Then Dean will get funding if he wins Michigan or shows well in Michigan, and people say he’s viable. He’s the only choice we have. He’ll attract from the center, he’ll attract from people, Republicans who won’t vote for Trump, of which there are a big percentage, could be 60% or more. It could be 70% won’t vote for Trump and also from the Democrats. So I think he’s a really interesting candidate, but we’ve got to get the word out.
We have some incredible moats among them. We have the Atlantic and the Pacific, and we have peaceful neighbors to the north and the South. We’re an enormously rich country. Capitalism still works effectively here. I get optimistic about the world when I talk to my friends who are either venture capitalists or my hobby of backing these young entrepreneurs. I talked to a founder of a startup, if you want to get optimistic about the world. So I think technology is going to save us. I think AI, of course, has its frightening, Terminator-like scenarios. But I’m going to take the opposite view that this is going to be a huge enabler of productivity, scientific discovery, drug discovery, and it’s going to make us healthier, happier, and better. So I do think the internet revolution had a lot of good, obviously some bad. I think the AI revolution’s going to be similar, but we’re at this other really interesting juncture in the world with technology, and we’re going to have to use it for our good.
On the media front, I’m happy about X, and I think Elon’s going to be successful here. I think advertisers will realize it’s a really good platform. The best way to reach me, if you want to sell something to me, I’ve actually bought stuff on some ads in X. I don’t remember the last time I responded to a direct response advertising. In terms of my business, I have an incredible team. It’s tiny. We’re one of the smallest firms relative to the assets we manage. It’s a bit like the Navy SEALs, not the US Army. We have only 40 people at Pershing Square. So it’s a tight team. I think we’ll do great things. I think we’re early on my ambitions investment-wise, I’ve always said I’d like to have a record as good as Warren Buffett’s. The problem is, each year he adds on another year.
He’s now in his 93rd year. So I’ve got 36 more years to just get where he is, and I think he’s going to add a lot more years. I’m excited about seeing what Neri is going to produce. She’s building an incredible company. They’re trying to solve a lot of problems with respect to products and buildings and their impact on the environment. Her vision is how do we design products that by virtue of the product’s existence, the world is a better place. Today, her world is a world where the existence of the new car actually is better for the environment than if the new car hadn’t existed. And think about that in every product scale, that’s what she’s working on. I don’t want to give away too much, but you’re going to see some early examples of what she’s working on. So again, I get excited about the future and crises are sort of a terrible thing to waste.
And we’ve had a number of these here. I think this disaster in the Middle East, my prediction is the next few months, this war will largely be over in terms of getting rid of Hamas. I think I can envision a world in which Saudi Arabia, some of the other Gulf states come together, take over the governance and reconstruction of Gaza. Security guarantees are put in place. The Abraham Accords continue to grow. A deal is made. Terrorists are ostracized that this October 7th experience on the Harvard, Penn, MIT, Columbia, unfortunately, other campuses is a wake-up call for universities. Generally, people see the problems with DEI, but understand the importance of diversity and inclusion, but not as a political movement, but as a way that we return to a meritocratic world where someone’s background is relevant in understanding their contribution, but we don’t have race quotas and things that were made illegal years ago actually being implemented in organizations on campus. So I think there’s, if we can go through a corrective phase, and I’m an optimist and I hope we get there.
Click link to jump approximately to that part in the transcript:
- 0:00 – Introduction
- 0:47 – Investing basics
- 5:39 – Investing in music
- 14:00 – Process of researching companies
- 18:39 – Investing in restaurants
- 24:08 – Investing in Google
- 29:50 – AI
- 35:05 – Warren Buffet
- 37:14 – Psychology of investing
- 46:45 – Activist investing
- 56:33 – General Growth Properties
- 1:12:49 – Canadian Pacific Railway
- 1:20:13 – OpenAI
- 1:24:24 – Biggest loss and lowest point
- 1:39:13 – Herbalife and Carl Icahn
- 1:56:03 – Oct 7
- 2:02:34 – College campus protests
- 2:21:01 – DEI in universities
- 2:41:52 – Neri Oxman
- 3:07:22 – X and free speech
- 3:11:46 – Trump
- 3:19:22 – Dean Phillips
- 3:26:28 – Future
Introduction
Bill Ackman
The only person who’ll cause you more harm than a thief with a dagger is a journalist with a pen.
The only person who’ll cause you more harm than a thief with a dagger is a journalist with a pen.
Lex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Bill Ackman, a legendary activist investor who has been part of some of the biggest and at times, controversial trades in history. Also, he is fearlessly vocal on X, FKA Twitter, and uses the platform to fight for ideas he believes in. For example, he was a central figure in the resignation of the President of Harvard University, Claudine Gay, the saga of which we discuss in this episode. This is the Lex Fridman podcast to support it. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now to you, friends, here’s Bill Ackman.
The following is a conversation with Bill Ackman, a legendary activist investor who has been part of some of the biggest and at times, controversial trades in history. Also, he is fearlessly vocal on X, FKA Twitter, and uses the platform to fight for ideas he believes in. For example, he was a central figure in the resignation of the President of Harvard University, Claudine Gay, the saga of which we discuss in this episode. This is the Lex Fridman podcast to support it. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now to you, friends, here’s Bill Ackman.
Investing basics
In your lecture on the basics of finance and investing, you mentioned a book, Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham, as being formative in your life. What key lesson do you take away from that book that informs your own investing?
Bill Ackman
Sure. Actually, it was the first investment book I read, and as such, it was kind of the inspiration for my career and a lot of my life. So important book. Bear in mind, this is sort of after the Great Depression, people lost confidence investing in markets, World War II, and then he writes this book. It’s for the average man, and basically he says that you have to understand the difference between price and value. Price is what you pay, value is what you get. And he said the stock market is here to serve you, and it’s a bit like the neighbor that comes by every day and makes you an offer for your house. It makes you a stupid offer, you ignore. It makes you a great offer, you can take it. And that’s the stock market.
Sure. Actually, it was the first investment book I read, and as such, it was kind of the inspiration for my career and a lot of my life. So important book. Bear in mind, this is sort of after the Great Depression, people lost confidence investing in markets, World War II, and then he writes this book. It’s for the average man, and basically he says that you have to understand the difference between price and value. Price is what you pay, value is what you get. And he said the stock market is here to serve you, and it’s a bit like the neighbor that comes by every day and makes you an offer for your house. It makes you a stupid offer, you ignore. It makes you a great offer, you can take it. And that’s the stock market.
And the key is to figure out what something’s worth and you have to kind of weigh it. He talked about the difference between… He said the stock market in the short term is a voting machine. It represents speculative interests, supply and demand of people in the short term. But in the long term, the stock market’s a weighing machine, much more accurate. It’s going to tell you what something’s worth. And so if you can define what something’s worth, then you can really take advantage of the market because it’s really here to help you. And that’s kind of the message of the book.
Lex Fridman
In that same way, there’s a kind of difference between speculation and investing.
In that same way, there’s a kind of difference between speculation and investing.
Bill Ackman
Yeah, speculation is just a bit like trading crypto, right? You’re-
Yeah, speculation is just a bit like trading crypto, right? You’re-
Lex Fridman
Strong words.
Strong words.
Bill Ackman
Well, short-term trading crypto. Maybe in the long run there’s intrinsic value, but many investors in a bubble going into the crash were really just pure speculators. They didn’t know what things were worth, they just knew they were going up. That’s speculation. And investing is doing your homework, digging down, understanding a business, understanding the competitive dynamics of an industry, understanding what management’s going to do, understanding what price you’re going to pay. The value of anything, I would say, other than love, let’s say, is the present value of the cash you can take out of it over its life. Now, some people think about love that way, but it’s not the right way to think about love. So investing is about basically building a model of what this business is going to produce over its lifetime.
Well, short-term trading crypto. Maybe in the long run there’s intrinsic value, but many investors in a bubble going into the crash were really just pure speculators. They didn’t know what things were worth, they just knew they were going up. That’s speculation. And investing is doing your homework, digging down, understanding a business, understanding the competitive dynamics of an industry, understanding what management’s going to do, understanding what price you’re going to pay. The value of anything, I would say, other than love, let’s say, is the present value of the cash you can take out of it over its life. Now, some people think about love that way, but it’s not the right way to think about love. So investing is about basically building a model of what this business is going to produce over its lifetime.
Lex Fridman
So how do you get to that, this idea called value investing? How do you get to the value of a thing? Even philosophically, value of anything really but we can just talk about the things that are on the stock market, companies.
So how do you get to that, this idea called value investing? How do you get to the value of a thing? Even philosophically, value of anything really but we can just talk about the things that are on the stock market, companies.
Bill Ackman
The value of a security is the present value of the cash you can take out of it over its life. So if you think about a bond, a bond pays a 5% coupon, interest rate. You get that, let’s say, every year or twice a year, split in half, and it’s very predictable. And if it’s a US government bond, you know you’re going to get it. So that’s a pretty easy thing to value. A stock is an interest in a business. It’s like owning a piece of a company and a business, a profitable one, is like a bond in that it generates these coupons or these earnings or cashflow every year. The difference with a stock and a bond is that the bond, it’s a contract. You know what you’re going to get as long as they don’t go bankrupt and default. With the stock, you have to make predictions about the business.
The value of a security is the present value of the cash you can take out of it over its life. So if you think about a bond, a bond pays a 5% coupon, interest rate. You get that, let’s say, every year or twice a year, split in half, and it’s very predictable. And if it’s a US government bond, you know you’re going to get it. So that’s a pretty easy thing to value. A stock is an interest in a business. It’s like owning a piece of a company and a business, a profitable one, is like a bond in that it generates these coupons or these earnings or cashflow every year. The difference with a stock and a bond is that the bond, it’s a contract. You know what you’re going to get as long as they don’t go bankrupt and default. With the stock, you have to make predictions about the business.
How many widgets are going to sell this year, how many are going to sell next year, what are the costs going to be? How much of the money that they generate? Do they need to reinvest in the business to keep the business going? And that’s more complicated. But what we do is we try to find businesses where, with a very high degree of confidence, we know what those cash flows are going to be for a very long time. And very few businesses that you can have a really high degree of certainty about. And as a result, many investments are speculations because it’s really very difficult to predict the future. So what we do for a living, what I do for a living is find those rare companies that you can kind of predict what they’re going to look like over a very long period of time.
Lex Fridman
So what are the factors that indicate that a company is going to be something that’s going to make a lot of money, it’s going to have a lot of value, and it’s going to be reliable over a long period of time? And what is your process of figuring out whether a company is or isn’t that?
So what are the factors that indicate that a company is going to be something that’s going to make a lot of money, it’s going to have a lot of value, and it’s going to be reliable over a long period of time? And what is your process of figuring out whether a company is or isn’t that?
Investing in music
Bill Ackman
So every consumer has a view on different brands and different companies. And what we look for are these non-disruptively businesses, a business where you can close your eyes, stock market shuts for a decade, and you know that 10 years from now it’s going to be a more valuable, more profitable company. So we own a business called Universal Music Group. It’s in the business of helping artists become global artists, recorded music business, and it’s in the business of owning the music publishing rights of songwriters. And I think music is forever, right? Music is a many thousand year old part of the human experience, and I think it will be thousands of years from now. And so that’s a pretty good backdrop to invest in a company. And the company basically owns a third of the global recorded music, the most dominant market share in the business.
So every consumer has a view on different brands and different companies. And what we look for are these non-disruptively businesses, a business where you can close your eyes, stock market shuts for a decade, and you know that 10 years from now it’s going to be a more valuable, more profitable company. So we own a business called Universal Music Group. It’s in the business of helping artists become global artists, recorded music business, and it’s in the business of owning the music publishing rights of songwriters. And I think music is forever, right? Music is a many thousand year old part of the human experience, and I think it will be thousands of years from now. And so that’s a pretty good backdrop to invest in a company. And the company basically owns a third of the global recorded music, the most dominant market share in the business.
They’re the best at taking an artist who’s 18 years old, who’s got a great voice, and has started to get a presence on YouTube and Instagram and helping that artist become a superstar. And that’s a unique talent. And the end result is the best artists in the world want to come work for them, but they also have this incredible library of the Beatles, the Rolling Stone, U2, et cetera. And then if you think about what music has become… It used to be about what records and CDs and eight track tapes for those of whom… And it was about a new format and that’s how they drive sales. And it’s become a business which is like the podcast business, streaming. And streaming is a lot more predictable than selling records. You can sort of say, “Okay, how many people have smartphones? How many people are going to have smartphones next year?”
There’s a kind of global penetration over time of smartphones. You pay, call it, 10, 11 bucks a month for a subscription or less for a family plan and you can kind of build a model of what the world looks like and predict the growth of the streaming business, predict what kind of market share Universal is going to have over time. You can’t get to a precise view of value. You can get to an approximation. And the key is to buy at a price that represents a big discount to that approximation. And that gets back to Ben Graham. Ben Graham invented this concept of margin of safety. You want to buy a company at a price that if you’re wrong about what you think it’s worth and it turns out to be worth 30% less, you paid a deep enough discount to your estimate that you’re still okay. A big part of investing is not losing money. If you can avoid losing money and then have a few great hits, you can do very, very well over time.
Lex Fridman
Well, music is interesting because yes, music’s been around for a very long time, but the way to make money from music has been evolving. Like you mentioned streaming, there’s a big transition initiated by, I guess, Napster, then created Spotify of how you make money on music with Apple and with all of this. And the question is, how well are companies like UMG able to adjust to such transformations? One, I could ask you about the future, which is artificial intelligence being able to generate music, for example.
Well, music is interesting because yes, music’s been around for a very long time, but the way to make money from music has been evolving. Like you mentioned streaming, there’s a big transition initiated by, I guess, Napster, then created Spotify of how you make money on music with Apple and with all of this. And the question is, how well are companies like UMG able to adjust to such transformations? One, I could ask you about the future, which is artificial intelligence being able to generate music, for example.
Bill Ackman
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
There have been a lot of amazing advancements with… So do you have to also think about that. When you close your eyes, all the things you think about, are you imagining the possible ways that the future is completely different from the present and how well this company will be able to surf the wave of that?
There have been a lot of amazing advancements with… So do you have to also think about that. When you close your eyes, all the things you think about, are you imagining the possible ways that the future is completely different from the present and how well this company will be able to surf the wave of that?
Bill Ackman
Sure. And they’ve had to surf a lot of waves. And actually the music business peaked the last time in the late ’90s or 2000 timeframe. And that really innovation, Napster, digitization of music, almost killed the industry. And Universal really led an effort to save the industry and actually made an early deal with Spotify that enabled the industry to really recover. And so by virtue of their market position and their credibility and their willingness to kind of adopt new technologies, they’ve kept their position. Now, they of course had this huge advantage because I think the Beatles are forever, I think U2 is forever, I think Rolling Stones are forever. So they had a nice base of assets that were important and I think will forever be, and forever is a long time. Again, enormous… There are all kinds of risks in every business. This is one that I think has a very high degree of persistence.
Sure. And they’ve had to surf a lot of waves. And actually the music business peaked the last time in the late ’90s or 2000 timeframe. And that really innovation, Napster, digitization of music, almost killed the industry. And Universal really led an effort to save the industry and actually made an early deal with Spotify that enabled the industry to really recover. And so by virtue of their market position and their credibility and their willingness to kind of adopt new technologies, they’ve kept their position. Now, they of course had this huge advantage because I think the Beatles are forever, I think U2 is forever, I think Rolling Stones are forever. So they had a nice base of assets that were important and I think will forever be, and forever is a long time. Again, enormous… There are all kinds of risks in every business. This is one that I think has a very high degree of persistence.
And I can’t envision a world beyond streaming in a sense… Now you may have a Neuralink chip in your head instead of a phone, but the music can come in a digitized kind of format, you’re going to want to have an infinite library that you can walk around in your pocket or in your brain. It’s not going to matter that much of the form factor. The device changes. It’s not really that important whether it’s Spotify or Apple or Amazon that are the so-called DSPs or the providers. I think the value is really going to reside in the content owners. And that’s really the artists and the label.
Lex Fridman
And I actually think AI is not going to be the primary creator of music. I think we’re going to actually face the reality that it’s not that music has been around for thousands of years, but musicians and music has been around. We actually care to know who’s the musician that created it, just like we want to know who’s the artist, human artist that created a piece of art.
And I actually think AI is not going to be the primary creator of music. I think we’re going to actually face the reality that it’s not that music has been around for thousands of years, but musicians and music has been around. We actually care to know who’s the musician that created it, just like we want to know who’s the artist, human artist that created a piece of art.
Bill Ackman
I totally agree. If you think about it, there’s lots of other technologies and computers that have been used to generate music over time but no one falls in love with a computer generated track. And Taylor Swift, incredible music, but it’s also about the artist and her story and her physical presence and the live experience. I don’t think you’re going to sit there and someone’s going to put a computer up on stage and it’s going to play and people are going to get excited around it. So I think AI is really going to be a tool to make artists better artists. A synthesizer really created the opportunity for one man to have an orchestra. Maybe a bit of a threat to a percussionist, but not maybe. Maybe it drove even more demand for the live experience.
I totally agree. If you think about it, there’s lots of other technologies and computers that have been used to generate music over time but no one falls in love with a computer generated track. And Taylor Swift, incredible music, but it’s also about the artist and her story and her physical presence and the live experience. I don’t think you’re going to sit there and someone’s going to put a computer up on stage and it’s going to play and people are going to get excited around it. So I think AI is really going to be a tool to make artists better artists. A synthesizer really created the opportunity for one man to have an orchestra. Maybe a bit of a threat to a percussionist, but not maybe. Maybe it drove even more demand for the live experience.
Lex Fridman
Unless that computer has human- like sentience, which I believe is a real possibility. But then it’s really, from a business perspective, no different than a human. If it has an identity, that’s basically fame and an influence, and there’ll be a robot Taylor Swift and it doesn’t really matter-
Unless that computer has human- like sentience, which I believe is a real possibility. But then it’s really, from a business perspective, no different than a human. If it has an identity, that’s basically fame and an influence, and there’ll be a robot Taylor Swift and it doesn’t really matter-
Bill Ackman
That’s a copyrightable asset I would think, right? Yeah.
That’s a copyrightable asset I would think, right? Yeah.
Lex Fridman
And then there’ll-
And then there’ll-
Bill Ackman
I’m not sure that’s the world I’m excited about that.
I’m not sure that’s the world I’m excited about that.
Lex Fridman
That’s a different discussion. The world is not going to ask your permission to become what it’s becoming, but you could still make money on it. Presumably there’d be a capital system and there’d be some laws under which I believe AI systems will have rights that are akin to human rights and we’re going to have to contend with what that means.
That’s a different discussion. The world is not going to ask your permission to become what it’s becoming, but you could still make money on it. Presumably there’d be a capital system and there’d be some laws under which I believe AI systems will have rights that are akin to human rights and we’re going to have to contend with what that means.
Bill Ackman
Well, there’s sort of name and likeness rights that have to be protected. Now, can a name be attributed to a Tesla robot? I don’t know.
Well, there’s sort of name and likeness rights that have to be protected. Now, can a name be attributed to a Tesla robot? I don’t know.
Lex Fridman
I think so. I think it’s quite obvious to me.
I think so. I think it’s quite obvious to me.
Bill Ackman
Okay, so those are more potential artists for us to represent at Universal.
Okay, so those are more potential artists for us to represent at Universal.
Lex Fridman
Exactly, exactly. All right.
Exactly, exactly. All right.
Bill Ackman
That’s sort of one example. Another example could be just the restaurant industry. If you look at businesses like a McDonald’s, it’s… Whatever, the company’s like an 1950 vintage business and here we are, 75 years later, and you can kind of predict what it’s going to look like over time. And the menu’s going to adjust over time to consumer tastes but I think the hamburger and fries is probably forever.
That’s sort of one example. Another example could be just the restaurant industry. If you look at businesses like a McDonald’s, it’s… Whatever, the company’s like an 1950 vintage business and here we are, 75 years later, and you can kind of predict what it’s going to look like over time. And the menu’s going to adjust over time to consumer tastes but I think the hamburger and fries is probably forever.
Lex Fridman
The Beatles, the Rolling Stones, the hamburger and fries are forever. I was eating at Chipotle last night as I was preparing these notes-
The Beatles, the Rolling Stones, the hamburger and fries are forever. I was eating at Chipotle last night as I was preparing these notes-
Bill Ackman
Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you.
Lex Fridman
And yeah, it is one of my favorite places to eat. You said it is a place that you eat. You obviously also invest in it. What do you get at Chipotle?
And yeah, it is one of my favorite places to eat. You said it is a place that you eat. You obviously also invest in it. What do you get at Chipotle?
Bill Ackman
I tend to get a double chicken.
I tend to get a double chicken.
Lex Fridman
Bowl or burrito?
Bowl or burrito?
Bill Ackman
I like the burrito, but I generally try to order the bowl. Cut the carb part.
I like the burrito, but I generally try to order the bowl. Cut the carb part.
Lex Fridman
For health reasons. All right.
For health reasons. All right.
Bill Ackman
And double chicken, guac, lettuce, black beans.
And double chicken, guac, lettuce, black beans.
Process of researching companies
Lex Fridman
And I’m more of a steak guy, just putting that on the record. What’s the actual process you go through, literally the process of figuring out what the value of a company is? How do you do the research? Is it reading documents? Is it talking to people? How do you do it?
And I’m more of a steak guy, just putting that on the record. What’s the actual process you go through, literally the process of figuring out what the value of a company is? How do you do the research? Is it reading documents? Is it talking to people? How do you do it?
Bill Ackman
All of the above. So Chipotle, what attracted us initially is the stock price dropped by about 50%. Great company, great concept. Athletes love it, consumers love it. Healthy, sustainable, fresh food made in front of your eyes and great… Steve Ells is the founder, did an amazing job, but ultimately the company’s lacking some of the systems and had a food safety issue. Consumers got sick, almost killed the rent. But the reality of the fast food, quick service industry is almost every fast food company has had a food safety issue over time. And the vast majority have survived. And we said, “Look, it’s such a great concept,” but their approach was not… It was far from my deal, but we start with usually reading the SEC filing. So companies file a 10-K or an annual report and they file these quarterly reports called 10-Qs. They have a proxy statement which describes the governance, the board structure.
All of the above. So Chipotle, what attracted us initially is the stock price dropped by about 50%. Great company, great concept. Athletes love it, consumers love it. Healthy, sustainable, fresh food made in front of your eyes and great… Steve Ells is the founder, did an amazing job, but ultimately the company’s lacking some of the systems and had a food safety issue. Consumers got sick, almost killed the rent. But the reality of the fast food, quick service industry is almost every fast food company has had a food safety issue over time. And the vast majority have survived. And we said, “Look, it’s such a great concept,” but their approach was not… It was far from my deal, but we start with usually reading the SEC filing. So companies file a 10-K or an annual report and they file these quarterly reports called 10-Qs. They have a proxy statement which describes the governance, the board structure.
Conference call transcripts are publicly available. It’s very helpful to go back five years and learn the story. “Here’s how management describes their business, here’s what they say they’re going to do,” and you can follow along to see what they do. It’s like a historical record of how competent and truthful they are. It’s a very useful device. And then, of course, looking at competitors and thinking about what could dislodge this company. And then we’ll talk to… If it’s an industry we don’t know well… We know the restaurant industry really well. Music industry, we will talk to people in the industry. We’ll try to understand the difference between publishing and recorded music. We’ll look at the competitors, we’ll read books. I read a book about the music industry or a couple books about the industry.
So it’s a bit like a big research project. And these, so-called expert networks now, and you can get pretty much anyone on the phone and they’ll talk to you about an aspect of the industry that you don’t understand, want to learn more about. Try to get a sense… Public filings of companies generally give you a lot of information, but not everything you want to know. And you can learn more by talking to experts about some of the industry dynamics, the personalities. You want to get a sense of management. I like watching podcasts. If a CEO were to do a podcast or a YouTube interview, you get a sense of the people.
Lex Fridman
So in the case of Chipotle, for example… By the way, I could talk about Chipotle all day. I just love it. I love it. I wish there was a sponsor.
So in the case of Chipotle, for example… By the way, I could talk about Chipotle all day. I just love it. I love it. I wish there was a sponsor.
Bill Ackman
I’ll mention it to the CEO.
I’ll mention it to the CEO.
Lex Fridman
Don’t make promises you can’t keep, Bill.
Don’t make promises you can’t keep, Bill.
Bill Ackman
I’m not making… Brian Nichols a fantastic CEO. He’s not going to spend $1 that he doesn’t think is in the company’s best interest.
I’m not making… Brian Nichols a fantastic CEO. He’s not going to spend $1 that he doesn’t think is in the company’s best interest.
Lex Fridman
All right. All I want is free Chipotle, come on now. What was I saying? Oh, and so you look at a company like Chipotle and then you see there’s a difficult moment in its history, like you said that there was a food safety issue and then you say, “Okay, well I see a path where we can fix this and therefore even though the price is low, we can get it to where the price goes up to its value.”
All right. All I want is free Chipotle, come on now. What was I saying? Oh, and so you look at a company like Chipotle and then you see there’s a difficult moment in its history, like you said that there was a food safety issue and then you say, “Okay, well I see a path where we can fix this and therefore even though the price is low, we can get it to where the price goes up to its value.”
Bill Ackman
So the kind of business we’re looking for is sort of the kind of business everyone should be looking for, right? A great business, it’s got a long-term trajectory of growth even beyond the foreseeable distance. Those are the kind of businesses you want to own, you want businesses that generate a lot of cash, you want businesses you can easily understand, you want businesses with these sort of huge barriers to entry where it’s difficult for others to compete. You want companies that don’t have to constantly raise capital. And these are some of the great business of the world, but people have figured out that those are the great businesses. So the problem is those companies tend to have very high stock prices and the value is generally built into the price you have to pay for the business.
So the kind of business we’re looking for is sort of the kind of business everyone should be looking for, right? A great business, it’s got a long-term trajectory of growth even beyond the foreseeable distance. Those are the kind of businesses you want to own, you want businesses that generate a lot of cash, you want businesses you can easily understand, you want businesses with these sort of huge barriers to entry where it’s difficult for others to compete. You want companies that don’t have to constantly raise capital. And these are some of the great business of the world, but people have figured out that those are the great businesses. So the problem is those companies tend to have very high stock prices and the value is generally built into the price you have to pay for the business.
So we can’t earn the kind of returns we want to earn for investors by paying a really high price. Price matters a lot. You can buy the best business in the world and if you overpay, you’re not going to earn particularly attractive returns. So we get involved in cases where a great business has kind of made a big mistake or you’ve a company that’s kind of lost its way, but it’s recoverable. And we buy from shareholders who are disappointed, who’ve lost confidence, selling at a low price relative to what it’s worth if fixed. And then we try to be helpful in fixing the company.
Investing in restaurants
Lex Fridman
You said that barriers to entry… You said a lot of really interesting qualities of companies very quickly in a sequence of statements that took less than 10 seconds to say, but some of them were… All of them were fascinating. So you said barriers to entry. How do you know if there’s a type of moat protecting the competitors from stepping up to the plate?
You said that barriers to entry… You said a lot of really interesting qualities of companies very quickly in a sequence of statements that took less than 10 seconds to say, but some of them were… All of them were fascinating. So you said barriers to entry. How do you know if there’s a type of moat protecting the competitors from stepping up to the plate?
Bill Ackman
The most difficult analysis to do as an investor is that, is kind of figuring out how wide is the moat, how much at risk is the business to disruption? And we’re in, I would say, the greatest period of disruptability in history. Technology… A couple of 19 year olds can leave whatever university or maybe they didn’t even go in the first place, they can raise millions of dollars, they can get access to infinite bandwidth storage. They can contract with engineers in low cost markets around the world. They could build a virtual company and they can disrupt businesses that seem super established over time. And then on top of that, you have major companies with multi-trillion dollar market caps working to find profits wherever they can. And so that’s a dangerous world in a way to be an investor. And so you have to find businesses that it’s hard to foresee a world in which they get disrupted.
The most difficult analysis to do as an investor is that, is kind of figuring out how wide is the moat, how much at risk is the business to disruption? And we’re in, I would say, the greatest period of disruptability in history. Technology… A couple of 19 year olds can leave whatever university or maybe they didn’t even go in the first place, they can raise millions of dollars, they can get access to infinite bandwidth storage. They can contract with engineers in low cost markets around the world. They could build a virtual company and they can disrupt businesses that seem super established over time. And then on top of that, you have major companies with multi-trillion dollar market caps working to find profits wherever they can. And so that’s a dangerous world in a way to be an investor. And so you have to find businesses that it’s hard to foresee a world in which they get disrupted.
The beauty of the restaurant business… Our best track record is in restaurants. We’ve never lost money. We’ve only made a fortune, interestingly, investing restaurants. A big part of it, it’s a really simple business. If you get Chipotle right and you’re at a hundred stores, it’s not so hard to envision getting to 200 stores and then getting to 500 stores, right? And the key is maintaining the brand image, growing intelligently, having the right systems. Now when you go from a hundred stores to 3,500 stores, you have to know what you’re doing and there’s a lot of complexity. If you think about your local restaurant, the family’s working in the business, they’re watching the cash register, and you can probably open another restaurant across town, but there are very few restaurant operators that own more than a few restaurants and operate them successfully.
And the quick service business is about systems and building a model that a stranger who doesn’t know the restaurant industry can come in and enter the business and build a successful franchise. Now, Chipotle is not a franchise company. They actually own all their own stores, but many of the most successful restaurant companies are franchise models like a Burger King, a McDonald’s, Tim Horton’s, all these various brands, Popeyes. And there it’s about systems, but the same systems apply whether you own all the stores and it’s run by a big corporation or whether the owners of the restaurants are sort of franchisees, local entrepreneurs.
Lex Fridman
So if the restaurant has scaled to a certain number, that means they’ve figured out some kind of system that works. And it’s very difficult to develop that kind of system. So that’s a moat?
So if the restaurant has scaled to a certain number, that means they’ve figured out some kind of system that works. And it’s very difficult to develop that kind of system. So that’s a moat?
Bill Ackman
A moat is you get to a certain scale and you do it successfully and the brand is now the understood by the consumer. And what’s interesting about Chipotle is what they’ve achieved is difficult. They’re not buying frozen hamburgers, getting shipped in. They’re buying fresh, sustainably sourced ingredients. They’re preparing food in the store. That was a first. The quality of the product at Chipotle is incredible. It’s the highest quality food. You can get a serious dinner for under 20 bucks and eat really healthfully and very high quality ingredients. And that’s just not available anywhere else. And it’s very hard to replicate and to build those relationships with farmers around the country. It’s a lot easier to make a deal with one of the big massive food producers and buy your pork from them than to buy from a whole bunch of farmers around the country. And so that is a big moat for Chipotle, very difficult to replicate.
A moat is you get to a certain scale and you do it successfully and the brand is now the understood by the consumer. And what’s interesting about Chipotle is what they’ve achieved is difficult. They’re not buying frozen hamburgers, getting shipped in. They’re buying fresh, sustainably sourced ingredients. They’re preparing food in the store. That was a first. The quality of the product at Chipotle is incredible. It’s the highest quality food. You can get a serious dinner for under 20 bucks and eat really healthfully and very high quality ingredients. And that’s just not available anywhere else. And it’s very hard to replicate and to build those relationships with farmers around the country. It’s a lot easier to make a deal with one of the big massive food producers and buy your pork from them than to buy from a whole bunch of farmers around the country. And so that is a big moat for Chipotle, very difficult to replicate.
Lex Fridman
And by the way, another company, I think, you have a stake in is McDonald’s?
And by the way, another company, I think, you have a stake in is McDonald’s?
Bill Ackman
No. We own a company called Restaurant Brands. Restaurant Brands owns a number of quick service companies, one of which is Burger King.
No. We own a company called Restaurant Brands. Restaurant Brands owns a number of quick service companies, one of which is Burger King.
Lex Fridman
Burger King, okay. Well, it’s been a meme for a while, but… Burger King is great too. Wendy’s, whatever. But usually I go McDonald’s, I’ll just eat burger patties. I don’t know if you knew you could do this, but a burger patty… Burger King can do this, McDonald’s. It’s actually way cheaper.
Burger King, okay. Well, it’s been a meme for a while, but… Burger King is great too. Wendy’s, whatever. But usually I go McDonald’s, I’ll just eat burger patties. I don’t know if you knew you could do this, but a burger patty… Burger King can do this, McDonald’s. It’s actually way cheaper.
Bill Ackman
They’ll just sell you the patty.
They’ll just sell you the patty.
Lex Fridman
The patty and it’s cheap. It’s like $1.50 or $2 per patty and it’s about 250 calories and it’s just meat. And despite the criticism or memes out there, that’s-
The patty and it’s cheap. It’s like $1.50 or $2 per patty and it’s about 250 calories and it’s just meat. And despite the criticism or memes out there, that’s-
Bill Ackman
Pretty healthy stuff.
Pretty healthy stuff.
Lex Fridman
It’s healthy stuff. And so the healthiest I feel is when I do carnivore. It doesn’t sound healthy, but if I eat only meat, I feel really good, I lose weight. I have all this energy, it’s crazy. And when I’m traveling, the easiest way to get meat is that.
It’s healthy stuff. And so the healthiest I feel is when I do carnivore. It doesn’t sound healthy, but if I eat only meat, I feel really good, I lose weight. I have all this energy, it’s crazy. And when I’m traveling, the easiest way to get meat is that.
Bill Ackman
So you go to McDonald’s, you order six patties.
So you go to McDonald’s, you order six patties.
Lex Fridman
Exactly. So there’s this sad meme of me just sitting alone in a car when I’m traveling, just eating beef patties at McDonald’s. But I love it. And you got to do what you love, what makes you happy, and that’s what makes me happy.
Exactly. So there’s this sad meme of me just sitting alone in a car when I’m traveling, just eating beef patties at McDonald’s. But I love it. And you got to do what you love, what makes you happy, and that’s what makes me happy.
Bill Ackman
I think maybe we’ll have Burger King feature in it. What about Flame World? What’s with these fried burgers? We got to get you to Burger King, grilled burgers.
I think maybe we’ll have Burger King feature in it. What about Flame World? What’s with these fried burgers? We got to get you to Burger King, grilled burgers.
Lex Fridman
Wait, is this fast food trash? I don’t know the details of how they’re made. I don’t have allegiance-
Wait, is this fast food trash? I don’t know the details of how they’re made. I don’t have allegiance-
Bill Ackman
I think we got a chance to switch you to Burger King.
I think we got a chance to switch you to Burger King.
Lex Fridman
Great. We’ll see. I’m making so many deals today, it’s wonderful. Okay, you were talking about moats, and this kind of remind me of Alphabet, the parent company.
Great. We’ll see. I’m making so many deals today, it’s wonderful. Okay, you were talking about moats, and this kind of remind me of Alphabet, the parent company.
Investing in Google
Bill Ackman
Sure. It’s a big position for us.
Sure. It’s a big position for us.
Lex Fridman
So it’s interesting that you think that maybe Alphabet fits some of these characteristics. It’s tricky to know with everything that’s happening in AI… And I’m interviewing Sundar Pichai soon. It’s interesting that you think that there’s a moat. And it’s also interesting to analyze it because as a consumer, as just a fan of technology, why is Google still around? It’s not just a search engine, it’s doing all the basics of the business of search really well, but they’re doing all these other stuff. So what’s your analysis of Alphabet? Why are you still positive about it?
So it’s interesting that you think that maybe Alphabet fits some of these characteristics. It’s tricky to know with everything that’s happening in AI… And I’m interviewing Sundar Pichai soon. It’s interesting that you think that there’s a moat. And it’s also interesting to analyze it because as a consumer, as just a fan of technology, why is Google still around? It’s not just a search engine, it’s doing all the basics of the business of search really well, but they’re doing all these other stuff. So what’s your analysis of Alphabet? Why are you still positive about it?
Bill Ackman
Sure. So it’s a business we’ve admired as a firm for, whatever, 15 years, but rarely got to a price that we felt we could own it. Because again, the expectations were so high and price really matters. Really the sort of AI scare, I would call it… Microsoft comes out with ChatGPT, they do an amazing demonstration. People like this most incredible product. And Google, which had been working on AI even earlier, obviously… The Microsoft was behind in AI. It was really their ChatGPT deal that gave them a market presence. And then Google does this fairly disastrous demonstration of Bard and the world says, “Oh my god, Google’s fallen behind in AI. AI is the future.” Stock gets crushed. Google gets to a price around 15 times earnings, which for a business of this quality is an extremely, extremely low price. And our view on Google… One way to think about it, when a business becomes a verb, that’s usually pretty good sign about the moat around the business.
Sure. So it’s a business we’ve admired as a firm for, whatever, 15 years, but rarely got to a price that we felt we could own it. Because again, the expectations were so high and price really matters. Really the sort of AI scare, I would call it… Microsoft comes out with ChatGPT, they do an amazing demonstration. People like this most incredible product. And Google, which had been working on AI even earlier, obviously… The Microsoft was behind in AI. It was really their ChatGPT deal that gave them a market presence. And then Google does this fairly disastrous demonstration of Bard and the world says, “Oh my god, Google’s fallen behind in AI. AI is the future.” Stock gets crushed. Google gets to a price around 15 times earnings, which for a business of this quality is an extremely, extremely low price. And our view on Google… One way to think about it, when a business becomes a verb, that’s usually pretty good sign about the moat around the business.
So you’d open your computer and you open your search and very high percentage of the world starts with a Google page in one line where you type in your search. The Google advertising, search, YouTube franchise is one of the most dominant franchises in the world. Very difficult to disrupt, extremely profitable. The world is moving from offline advertising to online advertising. And that trend, I think, continues. Why? Because you can actually see whether your ads work. They used to say about advertising, “You spend a fortune and you just don’t know which 50% of it works, but you just sort of spend the money because you know ultimately that’s going to bring in the customer.” And now with online advertising, you can see with granularity which dollars I’m spending… When people click on the search term and end up buying something and I pay, it’s a very high return on investment for the advertiser and they really dominate that business.
Now, AI, of course, is a risk. If all of a sudden people start searching or asking questions of ChatGPT and don’t start with the Google search bar, that’s a risk to the company. And so our view, based on work we had done and talked to industry experts, is that Google, by virtue of the investment they’ve made the time, the energy that people put into it, we felt their AI capabilities were, if anything, potentially greater than Microsoft ChatGPT and that the market had overreacted. And because Google is a big company, global business regulators scrutinized it incredibly carefully. They couldn’t take some of the same liberties a startup like OpenAI did in releasing a product. And I think Google took a more cautious approach in releasing an early version of Bard in terms of its capabilities. And that led the world to believe that they were behind.
And we ultimately concluded, if anything, they’re tied or ahead and you’re paying nothing for that potential business. And they also have huge advantages by virtue… If you think of all the data Google has, the search data, all the various applications, email and otherwise, and the Google suite of products, it’s an incredible data set. So they have more training data than pretty much any company in the world. They have incredible engineers, they have enormous financial resources. So that was kind of the bet. And we still think it’s probably the cheapest of the big seven companies in terms of the price you’re paying for the business relative to its current earnings. It also is a business that has a lot of potential for efficiency. Sometimes when you have this enormously profitable dominant company… All of the technology companies in the post March ’20 world grew enormously in terms of their teams and they probably overhired.
And so you’ve seen the Facebooks of the world and now even Google starting to get a little more efficient in terms of their operation. So we paid a low multiple for the business. One way to think about the value of the business is the price you pay for the earnings or alternatively what’s the yield? If you flip over the price over the earnings, it gives you kind of the yield of the business. So a 15 multiple is about almost a seven and a half percent yield. And that earnings yield is growing over time as the business grows. Compare it to what you can earn lending your money to the government, 4%, that’s a very attractive going in yield.
And then there’s all kinds of, what we call, optionality in all the various businesses and investments they’ve made that are losing money. They’ve got a cloud business that’s growing very rapidly, but they’re investing basically a hundred percent of the profits from that business and growth. So you’re in that earnings number, you’re not seeing any earnings from the cloud business, and they’re one of the top cloud players. So very interesting, generally well-managed company with incredible assets and resources and dominance, and it has no debt. It’s got a ton of cash. And so pretty good story.
AI
Lex Fridman
Is there something fundamentally different about AI that makes all of this more complicated, which is the exponential possibilities of the kinds of products and impact that AI could create when you’re looking at Meta, Microsoft, Alphabet, Google, all these companies, xAI, or maybe startups? Is there some more risk introduced by the possibilities of AI?
Is there something fundamentally different about AI that makes all of this more complicated, which is the exponential possibilities of the kinds of products and impact that AI could create when you’re looking at Meta, Microsoft, Alphabet, Google, all these companies, xAI, or maybe startups? Is there some more risk introduced by the possibilities of AI?
Bill Ackman
Absolutely. That’s a great question. Investing is about finding companies that can’t be disrupted. AI is the ultimate disruptable asset or technology. And that’s what makes investing treacherous, is that you own a business that’s enormously profitable, management gets, if you will, fat and happy, and then a new technology emerges that just takes away all their profitability. And AI is this incredibly powerful tool, which is why every business is saying, “How can I use AI in my business to make us more profitable, more successful, grow faster, and also disrupt or protect ourself from the incomings?” It’s a bit like… Buffett talks about a great business is like a cast…
Absolutely. That’s a great question. Investing is about finding companies that can’t be disrupted. AI is the ultimate disruptable asset or technology. And that’s what makes investing treacherous, is that you own a business that’s enormously profitable, management gets, if you will, fat and happy, and then a new technology emerges that just takes away all their profitability. And AI is this incredibly powerful tool, which is why every business is saying, “How can I use AI in my business to make us more profitable, more successful, grow faster, and also disrupt or protect ourself from the incomings?” It’s a bit like… Buffett talks about a great business is like a cast…
Bill Ackman
It’s a bit like Buffett talks about a great business, like a castle surrounded by this really wide moat but you have all these barbarians trying to get in and steal the princess. And it happens. Kodak, for example, was an amazing, incredibly dominant company until it disappeared. Polaroid, this incredible technology. And that’s why we have tended to stay away from companies that are technology companies because technology companies generally… The world is such a dynamic place that someone’s always working on a better version. And Kodak was caught up in the analog film world and then the world changed.
It’s a bit like Buffett talks about a great business, like a castle surrounded by this really wide moat but you have all these barbarians trying to get in and steal the princess. And it happens. Kodak, for example, was an amazing, incredibly dominant company until it disappeared. Polaroid, this incredible technology. And that’s why we have tended to stay away from companies that are technology companies because technology companies generally… The world is such a dynamic place that someone’s always working on a better version. And Kodak was caught up in the analog film world and then the world changed.
Lex Fridman
Well, Google was pretty fat and happy until ChatGPT came out.
Well, Google was pretty fat and happy until ChatGPT came out.
Bill Ackman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
How would you rate their ability to wake up, lose weight, and be less happy and aggressively rediscover their search for happiness?
How would you rate their ability to wake up, lose weight, and be less happy and aggressively rediscover their search for happiness?
Bill Ackman
I think you’ve seen a lot of that in the last year. And I would say some combination of embarrassment and pride are huge motivators for everyone from Sergey Brin, to the management of the company.
I think you’ve seen a lot of that in the last year. And I would say some combination of embarrassment and pride are huge motivators for everyone from Sergey Brin, to the management of the company.
Lex Fridman
And Demis Hassabis threw them into the picture and all of DeepMind teams, and the unification of teams and all the shakeups. It was interesting to watch the chaos. I love it. I love it when everybody freaks out. Like you said, partly embarrassment, and partly that competitive drive that drives engineers, is great. I can’t wait to see what… They’ve [inaudible 00:32:31] a lot of improvement in the product, let’s see where it goes. You mentioned management. How do you analyze the governance structure and the individual humans that are the managers of a company?
And Demis Hassabis threw them into the picture and all of DeepMind teams, and the unification of teams and all the shakeups. It was interesting to watch the chaos. I love it. I love it when everybody freaks out. Like you said, partly embarrassment, and partly that competitive drive that drives engineers, is great. I can’t wait to see what… They’ve [inaudible 00:32:31] a lot of improvement in the product, let’s see where it goes. You mentioned management. How do you analyze the governance structure and the individual humans that are the managers of a company?
Bill Ackman
So as I like to say, incentives drive all human behavior and that certainly applies in the business world. So understanding the people and what drives them, and what the actual financial and other incentives of a business, are very important part of the analysis for investing in a company. And you can learn a lot… I mentioned before, one great way to learn about a business is go back a decade and read everything that management has written about the business, and see what they’ve done over time. See what they’ve said…
So as I like to say, incentives drive all human behavior and that certainly applies in the business world. So understanding the people and what drives them, and what the actual financial and other incentives of a business, are very important part of the analysis for investing in a company. And you can learn a lot… I mentioned before, one great way to learn about a business is go back a decade and read everything that management has written about the business, and see what they’ve done over time. See what they’ve said…
Conference calls are actually relatively recent. When I started in the business, there weren’t conference call transcripts. Now you have a written record of everything management has said in response to questions from analysts, at conferences and otherwise. And so just you learn a lot about people by listening to what they say, how they answer questions, and ultimately their track record for doing what they say they’re going to do. Do they under promise and over deliver? Do they over promise and under deliver? Do they say what they’re going to do? Do they admit mistakes? Do they build great teams? Do people want to come work for them? Are they able to retain their talent?
And then part of it is how much are they running the business for the benefit of the business? How much are they running the business for the benefit of themselves? And that’s the analysis you do.
Lex Fridman
Are we talking about CEO, COO? What does management mean? How deep does it go?
Are we talking about CEO, COO? What does management mean? How deep does it go?
Bill Ackman
Sure. Very senior management matters enormously. We use the Chipotle example. Steve Ells, great entrepreneur. Business got to a scale he really couldn’t run it. We helped the company recruit a guy named Brian Niccol, and he was considered the best person in the quick service industry. He came in and completely rebuilt the company. Actually we moved the company, Chipotle was moved to California. And sometimes one way to redo the culture of a company is just to move it geographically, and then you can reboot the business.
Sure. Very senior management matters enormously. We use the Chipotle example. Steve Ells, great entrepreneur. Business got to a scale he really couldn’t run it. We helped the company recruit a guy named Brian Niccol, and he was considered the best person in the quick service industry. He came in and completely rebuilt the company. Actually we moved the company, Chipotle was moved to California. And sometimes one way to redo the culture of a company is just to move it geographically, and then you can reboot the business.
But a great leader has great followership. Over the course of their career, they’ll have a team they’ve built that will come follow them into the next opportunity. But the key is really the top person matters enormously, and then it’s who they recruit. You recruit an A-plus leader and they’re going to recruit other A- type people. You recruit a B-leader, you’re not going to recruit any great talent beneath them.
Warren Buffet
Lex Fridman
You mentioned Warren Buffett. You said you admire him as an investor. What do you find most interesting and powerful about his approach? What aspects of his approach to investing do you also practice?
You mentioned Warren Buffett. You said you admire him as an investor. What do you find most interesting and powerful about his approach? What aspects of his approach to investing do you also practice?
Bill Ackman
Sure. So most of what I’ve learned in the investment business, I’ve learned from Warren Buffett, he’s been my great professor of this business. My first book I read in the business was the Ben Graham Intelligent Investor, but fairly quickly you get to learn about Warren Buffett and I started by reading the Berkshire Hathaway annual reports. And then I eventually got the Buffett partnership letters that you could see, which are an amazing read to go back to the mid 1950s and read what he wrote to his limited partners when he first started out and just follow that trajectory over a long period of time. So what’s remarkable about him is one, duration, right? He’s still at it at 93. Two, it takes a very long-term view, but a big thing that you learn from him investing requires is incredible, dispassionate, unemotional quality. You have to be extremely economically rational, which is not a basic, it’s not something you learn in the jungle.
Sure. So most of what I’ve learned in the investment business, I’ve learned from Warren Buffett, he’s been my great professor of this business. My first book I read in the business was the Ben Graham Intelligent Investor, but fairly quickly you get to learn about Warren Buffett and I started by reading the Berkshire Hathaway annual reports. And then I eventually got the Buffett partnership letters that you could see, which are an amazing read to go back to the mid 1950s and read what he wrote to his limited partners when he first started out and just follow that trajectory over a long period of time. So what’s remarkable about him is one, duration, right? He’s still at it at 93. Two, it takes a very long-term view, but a big thing that you learn from him investing requires is incredible, dispassionate, unemotional quality. You have to be extremely economically rational, which is not a basic, it’s not something you learn in the jungle.
I don’t think it’s something that… If you think about surviving the jungle, the lion shows up and everyone starts running, you run with them. That does not work well in markets. In fact, you generally have to do the opposite, right? When the lemmings are running over the cliff, that’s the time where you’re facing the other direction and you’re running the other direction, i.e, you’re stepping in, you’re buying stocks at really low prices. Buffett’s been great at that and great at teaching about what he calls temperament, which is this sort of emotional or unemotional quality that you need to be able to dispassionately look at the world and say, “Okay, is this a real risk? Are people overreacting?” People tend to get excited about investments when stocks are going up and they get depressed when they’re going down. And I think that’s just inherently human. You have to reverse that. You have to get excited when things get cheaper and you got to get concerned when things get more expensive.
Psychology of investing
Lex Fridman
You’ve been a part of some big battles, some big losses, some big wins. It’s been a roller coaster. So in terms of temperament psychologically, how do you not let that break you? How do you maintain a calm demeanor and avoid running with a lemmings?
You’ve been a part of some big battles, some big losses, some big wins. It’s been a roller coaster. So in terms of temperament psychologically, how do you not let that break you? How do you maintain a calm demeanor and avoid running with a lemmings?
Bill Ackman
I think it’s something you learn over time. A key success factor is you want to have enough money in the bank that you’re going to survive regardless of what’s going on with volatility in markets, people who… One, you shouldn’t borrow money. So if you borrow money, you own stocks on margin, markets are going down and you have your livelihood at risk. It’s very difficult to be rational. So key is getting yourself to a place where you’re financially secure, you’re not going to lose your house. That’s kind of a key thing. And then also doing your homework.
I think it’s something you learn over time. A key success factor is you want to have enough money in the bank that you’re going to survive regardless of what’s going on with volatility in markets, people who… One, you shouldn’t borrow money. So if you borrow money, you own stocks on margin, markets are going down and you have your livelihood at risk. It’s very difficult to be rational. So key is getting yourself to a place where you’re financially secure, you’re not going to lose your house. That’s kind of a key thing. And then also doing your homework.
Stocks can trade at any price in the short term. And if you know what a business is worth and you understand the management and you know it extremely well, it’s not nearly as… It doesn’t bother you when a stock price goes down or it has much less impact on you because again, as Mr. Graham said, the short term, the markets are voting machine. You have a bunch of lemmings voting one direction that’s concerning. But if it’s a great business, doesn’t have a lot of debt and people are going to just listen to more music next year than this year, you know you’re going to do well. So it’s a bit some combination of being personally secure and also just knowing what you own and over time you build callouses, I would say.
Lex Fridman
So psychologically, just as a human being, speaking of lines and gazelles and all this kind of stuff, is it as simple as just being financially secure? Is there some just human qualities that you have to be born with slash develop?
So psychologically, just as a human being, speaking of lines and gazelles and all this kind of stuff, is it as simple as just being financially secure? Is there some just human qualities that you have to be born with slash develop?
Bill Ackman
I think so. I think now I’m a pretty emotional person I would say, or I feel pretty strong emotions, but not in investing. I’m remarkably immune to volatility and that’s a big advantage and it took some time for me to develop that.
I think so. I think now I’m a pretty emotional person I would say, or I feel pretty strong emotions, but not in investing. I’m remarkably immune to volatility and that’s a big advantage and it took some time for me to develop that.
Lex Fridman
So you weren’t born with that, you think?
So you weren’t born with that, you think?
Bill Ackman
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
So being emotional, do you want to respond to volatility?
So being emotional, do you want to respond to volatility?
Bill Ackman
Yeah, and it’s a bit… Again, you can learn a lot from other people’s experience. It’s one of the few businesses where you can learn an enormous amount by reading about other periods in history following Buffett’s career, the mistakes he made. If you’re investing a lot of capital, every one of your mistakes is going to be big, right? So we’ve made big mistakes. The good news is that the vast majority of things we’ve done have worked out really well. And so that also gives you confidence over time. But because we make very few investments, we own eight things today or seven companies of that matter, if we get one wrong, it’s going to be big news. And so the other nature of our business you have to be comfortable with is a lot of public scrutiny, a lot of public criticism. And that requires some experience. I call it that.
Yeah, and it’s a bit… Again, you can learn a lot from other people’s experience. It’s one of the few businesses where you can learn an enormous amount by reading about other periods in history following Buffett’s career, the mistakes he made. If you’re investing a lot of capital, every one of your mistakes is going to be big, right? So we’ve made big mistakes. The good news is that the vast majority of things we’ve done have worked out really well. And so that also gives you confidence over time. But because we make very few investments, we own eight things today or seven companies of that matter, if we get one wrong, it’s going to be big news. And so the other nature of our business you have to be comfortable with is a lot of public scrutiny, a lot of public criticism. And that requires some experience. I call it that.
Lex Fridman
I think we’ll talk about some of that. Financially secure is something I believe also recommend for even just everyday investors. Is there some general advice from the things you’ve been talking about that applies to everyday investors?
I think we’ll talk about some of that. Financially secure is something I believe also recommend for even just everyday investors. Is there some general advice from the things you’ve been talking about that applies to everyday investors?
Bill Ackman
Sure. So never invest money you can’t afford to lose. Where if you’d lost this money, you lose your house, et cetera. So being in a place where you’re investing money that you don’t care about the price in the short term, it’s money for your retirement, and you take a really long-term view, I think that’s key. Never investing, will you borrow money against your securities? The markets offer you the opportunity to leverage your investment and in most worlds you’ll be okay, except if there’s a financial crisis or a nuclear device gets detonated, God forbid somewhere in the world or there’s an unexpected war or someone kills a leader unexpectedly, things happen that can change the course of history and markets react very negatively to those kinds of events.
Sure. So never invest money you can’t afford to lose. Where if you’d lost this money, you lose your house, et cetera. So being in a place where you’re investing money that you don’t care about the price in the short term, it’s money for your retirement, and you take a really long-term view, I think that’s key. Never investing, will you borrow money against your securities? The markets offer you the opportunity to leverage your investment and in most worlds you’ll be okay, except if there’s a financial crisis or a nuclear device gets detonated, God forbid somewhere in the world or there’s an unexpected war or someone kills a leader unexpectedly, things happen that can change the course of history and markets react very negatively to those kinds of events.
And you can own the greatest business in the world trading for a hundred dollars a share, and next moment it could be 50. So as long as you don’t borrow against securities, you own really high quality businesses and it’s not money that you need in the short term, then you can actually be thoughtful about it. And that is a huge advantage. The vast majority of investors, it seems tend to be the ones that panic and the downturns get over related and when markets are doing well.
Lex Fridman
So be able to think long-term and be sufficiently financially secure such that you can afford to think long-term.
So be able to think long-term and be sufficiently financially secure such that you can afford to think long-term.
Bill Ackman
Now Buffett is the ultimate long-term thinker and just the decisions he makes, the consistency of the decisions he’s made over time and fitting into that sort of long-term framework is a very, very educational, let’s put it that way, for learning about this business.
Now Buffett is the ultimate long-term thinker and just the decisions he makes, the consistency of the decisions he’s made over time and fitting into that sort of long-term framework is a very, very educational, let’s put it that way, for learning about this business.
Lex Fridman
So you mentioned eight companies, but what do you think about mutual funds for everyday investors that diversify across a larger number of companies?
So you mentioned eight companies, but what do you think about mutual funds for everyday investors that diversify across a larger number of companies?
Bill Ackman
I think there are very few mutual funds. There are thousands and thousands of mutual funds. There are very few that earn their keep in terms of the fees they charge. They tend to be too diversified and too short-term. And you’re often much better off just buying an index fund. And many of them perform, if you look carefully at their portfolios are not so different from the underlying index itself and you tend to pay a much higher fee. Now, all of that being said, there’s some very talented mutual fund managers. A guy named Will Danoff at Fidelity has had a great record over a long period of time. The famous Peter Lynch, Ron Barron, another great long-term growth stock investor. So there’s some great mutual funds, but I put them in the handful versus the thousands. And if you’re in the thousands, I’d rather someone bought just an index fund basically.
I think there are very few mutual funds. There are thousands and thousands of mutual funds. There are very few that earn their keep in terms of the fees they charge. They tend to be too diversified and too short-term. And you’re often much better off just buying an index fund. And many of them perform, if you look carefully at their portfolios are not so different from the underlying index itself and you tend to pay a much higher fee. Now, all of that being said, there’s some very talented mutual fund managers. A guy named Will Danoff at Fidelity has had a great record over a long period of time. The famous Peter Lynch, Ron Barron, another great long-term growth stock investor. So there’s some great mutual funds, but I put them in the handful versus the thousands. And if you’re in the thousands, I’d rather someone bought just an index fund basically.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, index funds. But what would be the leap for an everyday investor to go to investing in a small number of companies like two, three, four, five companies?
Yeah, index funds. But what would be the leap for an everyday investor to go to investing in a small number of companies like two, three, four, five companies?
Bill Ackman
I even recommend for individual investors to invest in a dozen companies, you don’t get that much more benefit of diversification going from a dozen to 25 or even 50. Most of the benefits of diversification come in the first, call it 10 or 12. And if you’re investing in businesses that don’t have a lot of debt, they’re businesses that you can understand yourself, you understand… Actually individual investors did a much better job analyzing Tesla than the so-called professional investors or analysts, the vast majority of them. So if it’s a business you understand, if you bought a Tesla, you understand the product and its appeal to consumers, it’s a good place to start when you’re analyzing a company.
I even recommend for individual investors to invest in a dozen companies, you don’t get that much more benefit of diversification going from a dozen to 25 or even 50. Most of the benefits of diversification come in the first, call it 10 or 12. And if you’re investing in businesses that don’t have a lot of debt, they’re businesses that you can understand yourself, you understand… Actually individual investors did a much better job analyzing Tesla than the so-called professional investors or analysts, the vast majority of them. So if it’s a business you understand, if you bought a Tesla, you understand the product and its appeal to consumers, it’s a good place to start when you’re analyzing a company.
So I would invest in things you can understand, that’s kind of a key. You like Chipotle, you understand why they’re successful. You can go there every week and you can monitor. Is anything changing? How’s Chicken al Pastor, is that a good upgrade from the basic chicken? The drink offering is improving. The store is clean. I think you should invest in companies you really understand, simple businesses where you can predict with a high degree of confidence what it’s going to look like over time. And if you do that in a not particularly concentrated fashion and you don’t borrow money against your securities, you’ll probably do much better than your typical mutual fund.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, it’s interesting. Consumers that love a thing are actually good analysts of that thing, or I guess a good starting point.
Yeah, it’s interesting. Consumers that love a thing are actually good analysts of that thing, or I guess a good starting point.
Bill Ackman
And by the way, there’s much more information available today. When I was first investing, literally we had people faxing us documents from the SEC filings in Washington, D.C. Now everything’s available online, conference call transcripts are free. You have AI, you have unlimited data and all kinds of message boards and Reddit forums and things where people are sharing advice and everyone has their own… By virtue of their career or experience, they’ll know about an industry or a business and that gives them… I would take advantage of your own competitive advantages.
And by the way, there’s much more information available today. When I was first investing, literally we had people faxing us documents from the SEC filings in Washington, D.C. Now everything’s available online, conference call transcripts are free. You have AI, you have unlimited data and all kinds of message boards and Reddit forums and things where people are sharing advice and everyone has their own… By virtue of their career or experience, they’ll know about an industry or a business and that gives them… I would take advantage of your own competitive advantages.
Lex Fridman
I’m just afraid if I invest in Chipotle, I’ll be analyzing every little change of menu from a financial perspective and just be very critical.
I’m just afraid if I invest in Chipotle, I’ll be analyzing every little change of menu from a financial perspective and just be very critical.
Bill Ackman
If it’s going to affect your experience, I wouldn’t buy the stock.
If it’s going to affect your experience, I wouldn’t buy the stock.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I mean I should also say that I am somebody that emotionally does respond to volatility, which is why I’ve never bought index funds and I just notice myself psychologically being affected by the ups and downs of the market. I want to tune out because if I’m at all tuned in, it has a negative impact on my life.
Yeah, I mean I should also say that I am somebody that emotionally does respond to volatility, which is why I’ve never bought index funds and I just notice myself psychologically being affected by the ups and downs of the market. I want to tune out because if I’m at all tuned in, it has a negative impact on my life.
Bill Ackman
Yeah, that’s really important.
Yeah, that’s really important.
Activist investing
Lex Fridman
Can you explain what activist investing is? You’ve been talking about investing and then looking at companies when they’re struggling, stepping in and reconfiguring things within that company and helping it become great. So that’s part of it, but let’s just zoom out. What’s this idea of activist investing?
Can you explain what activist investing is? You’ve been talking about investing and then looking at companies when they’re struggling, stepping in and reconfiguring things within that company and helping it become great. So that’s part of it, but let’s just zoom out. What’s this idea of activist investing?
Bill Ackman
I think recently in the last couple of days I read an article saying that more than 50% of the capital in the world today invests in the stock markets passive indexed money. And that’s the most passive form, right? So if you think about an index fund, a machine buys a fixed set of securities in certain proportion. There’s no human judgment at all, and there’s no real person behind it, in a way. They never take steps to improve a business. They just quietly own securities. What we do is we invest our capital in a handful of things. We get to know them really, really well because you’re going to put 20% of your assets in something, you need to know it really well. But once you become a big holder and if you’ve got some thoughts on how to make a business more valuable, you can do more than just be a passive investor.
I think recently in the last couple of days I read an article saying that more than 50% of the capital in the world today invests in the stock markets passive indexed money. And that’s the most passive form, right? So if you think about an index fund, a machine buys a fixed set of securities in certain proportion. There’s no human judgment at all, and there’s no real person behind it, in a way. They never take steps to improve a business. They just quietly own securities. What we do is we invest our capital in a handful of things. We get to know them really, really well because you’re going to put 20% of your assets in something, you need to know it really well. But once you become a big holder and if you’ve got some thoughts on how to make a business more valuable, you can do more than just be a passive investor.
So our strategy is built upon finding great companies in some cases that have lost their way and then helping them succeed. And we can do that with ideas from outside the boardroom. Sometimes we take a seat on a board or more than one, and we work with the best management teams in the world to help these businesses succeed. So when I first went into this business, no one knew who we were and we didn’t have that much money. And so to influence what was to us a big company, we had to make a fair bit more noise, right? So we would buy a stake, we’d announce it publicly, we’d attempt to engage with management. The first activist investment we made at Pershing Square was Wendy’s. I couldn’t get the CEO to ever return my call. He didn’t return my call. Actually, in that case, our idea was Wendy’s owned a company called Tim Hortons, which was this coffee donut chain, and you could buy Wendy’s for basically $5 billion and they owned a hundred percent of Tim Hortons, which itself was worth more than 5 billion.
So you could literally buy Wendy’s, separate Tim Hortons and get Wendy’s for negative value. That seemed like a pretty good opportunity even though the business wasn’t doing that well. So we bought the stake, called the CEO, couldn’t get a meeting, nothing. So we hired actually Blackstone, which at that time had an investment bank and we hired them to do what’s called a fairness opinion of what Wendy’s would be worth if they followed our advice and they agreed to do it, paid them a fee for it. And then we mailed in a letter with a copy of the fairness opinion saying Wendy’s would basically be worth 80% more if they did what we said. And six weeks later they did what we said. So that’s activism, at least an early form of activism. With that kind of under our belt, we had a little more credibility and now we started to take things and stakes in companies.
The media would pay attention. So the media became kind of an important partner and some combination of shame, embarrassment and opportunity motivated management teams to do the right thing. And then beyond that, there’s certain steps you can take if management’s recalcitrant and the shareholders are on your side. But it’s a bit like running for office. You’ve got to get all the constituents to support you and your ideas. And if they support you and your ideas, you can overthrow, if you will, the board of a company. You bring in new talent and then take over the management of a business. And that’s the most extreme form of activism. So that’s kind of the early days, and what we did. And a lot of the early things that we did were, what we call sort of like investment banking activism where we’d go in and recommend something, a good investment bank would’ve recommended, and if they do it, we make a bunch of money.
And then we moved on to the next one. And then we realized an investment in a company called General Growth was the first time we took a board seat on a company. And there it was some financial restructuring and also an opportunity to improve the operations of the business, sit on the board of a company. And that was one of the best investments we ever made. And we said, “Okay, we can do more than just be an outside the boardroom investor and we can get involved in helping select the right management teams and helping guide the right management teams.” And then we’ve done that over years. And then I would say the last seven years we haven’t had to be an activist. An activist is generally someone who’s outside banging on the door trying to get in. We’re sort of built enough credibility that they open the door and they say, “Hey, Bill, what ideas do you have? So welcome. Would you like to join the board?”
We’re treated differently today than we were in the beginning. And that is… I would say some people might just call it being an engaged owner. And by the way, that’s the way investing was done in the Andrew Carnegie, JPMorgan days 150 years ago. You had these iconic business leaders that would own 20% of US steel, and when things would go wrong, they’d replace the board and the management and fix them. And over time, we went to a world where mutual funds were created in the 1920s, ’30s, index funds with Vanguard and others, and that all these controlling shareholders gave their stock to society or their children and multiple generations. And they were no longer controlling owners of businesses or very few. And that led to under performance and the opportunity for activists over time. And what activism has done, and I think we’ve helped lead this movement, is it restored the balance of power between the owners of the business and the management of the company. And that’s been a very good thing for the performance of the US stock market actually.
Lex Fridman
So the owners meaning the shareholders?
So the owners meaning the shareholders?
Bill Ackman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
And so there’s a more direct channel of communication with activists investing between the shareholders and the people running the company?
And so there’s a more direct channel of communication with activists investing between the shareholders and the people running the company?
Bill Ackman
Yes. So activists generally never own more than five or 10% of a business. So they don’t have control. So the way they get influence is they have to convince the other, but they have to get to sort of a majority of the other shareholders to support them. And if they can get that kind of support, they can behave almost like a controlling shareholder. And that’s how it works.
Yes. So activists generally never own more than five or 10% of a business. So they don’t have control. So the way they get influence is they have to convince the other, but they have to get to sort of a majority of the other shareholders to support them. And if they can get that kind of support, they can behave almost like a controlling shareholder. And that’s how it works.
Lex Fridman
So the running of companies, according to Bill Ackman is more democratic now.
So the running of companies, according to Bill Ackman is more democratic now.
Bill Ackman
It is. It is. But you need some thought leaders. So activists are kind of thought leaders. Because they can spend the time and the money. A retail investor that owns a thousand shares doesn’t have the resources or the time, they got a day job. Whereas an activist day job is finding the handful of things where there are opportunities.
It is. It is. But you need some thought leaders. So activists are kind of thought leaders. Because they can spend the time and the money. A retail investor that owns a thousand shares doesn’t have the resources or the time, they got a day job. Whereas an activist day job is finding the handful of things where there are opportunities.
Lex Fridman
So on average is a good to have such an engaged, powerful, influential investor helping control direct the direction of a company.
So on average is a good to have such an engaged, powerful, influential investor helping control direct the direction of a company.
Bill Ackman
It depends who that investor is, but generally I think it’s a good thing. And that’s why one of the problems with being CEO of a company today and having a very diversified shareholder base is the kind of short-term, long-term balance. And you have investors that have all different interests in terms of what they want to achieve and when they want it achieved. And CEO of a new company… A new CEO of an old company, let’s say, hasn’t had the chance to develop the credibility to make the kind of longer-term decisions and can be stuck in a cycle of being judged on a quarterly basis.
It depends who that investor is, but generally I think it’s a good thing. And that’s why one of the problems with being CEO of a company today and having a very diversified shareholder base is the kind of short-term, long-term balance. And you have investors that have all different interests in terms of what they want to achieve and when they want it achieved. And CEO of a new company… A new CEO of an old company, let’s say, hasn’t had the chance to develop the credibility to make the kind of longer-term decisions and can be stuck in a cycle of being judged on a quarterly basis.
And the best businesses are forever assets and decisions you make now have impact three, four or five years from now, in order to make… And sometimes there are decisions we make that have the effect of reducing the earnings of a company in the short-term because in the long term it’s going to make the business much more valuable. But sometimes it’s hard to have that kind of credibility when you’re a new CEO of a company. So when you have a major owner that’s respected by other shareholders sitting on the board saying, “Hey, the CEO is doing the right thing and making this expensive investment in a new factory, we’re spending more money on R&D because we’re developing something that’s going to pay off over time.” That large owner on the board can help buy the time necessary for management to behave in a longer term way. And that’s, I think, good for all the shareholders.
Lex Fridman
So that’s the good story. But can it get bad? Can you have a CEO who is a visionary and sees the long-term future of a company and an investor come in and have very selfish interest in just making more money in the short term and therefore destroy and manipulate the opinions of the shareholders and other people on the board in order to sink the company, maybe increase the price, but destroy the possibility of long-term value?
So that’s the good story. But can it get bad? Can you have a CEO who is a visionary and sees the long-term future of a company and an investor come in and have very selfish interest in just making more money in the short term and therefore destroy and manipulate the opinions of the shareholders and other people on the board in order to sink the company, maybe increase the price, but destroy the possibility of long-term value?
Bill Ackman
It could theoretically happen, but again, the activist in your example, generally doesn’t own a lot of stock. The shareholder basis today, the biggest shareholders are these index funds that are forever, right? The BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street, their ownership stakes are just at this point only growing because of the inflows of capital they have from shareholders. So they have to think or they should think very long-term and they’re going to be very skeptical of someone coming in with a short-term idea that drives the stock price up in the next six months, but impairs the company’s long-term ability to compete. And basically that ownership group prevents this kind of activity from really happening.
It could theoretically happen, but again, the activist in your example, generally doesn’t own a lot of stock. The shareholder basis today, the biggest shareholders are these index funds that are forever, right? The BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street, their ownership stakes are just at this point only growing because of the inflows of capital they have from shareholders. So they have to think or they should think very long-term and they’re going to be very skeptical of someone coming in with a short-term idea that drives the stock price up in the next six months, but impairs the company’s long-term ability to compete. And basically that ownership group prevents this kind of activity from really happening.
Lex Fridman
So people are generally skeptical of short-term activist investors?
So people are generally skeptical of short-term activist investors?
Bill Ackman
Yes, and they’re very few. I don’t really know any short-term activist investors.
Yes, and they’re very few. I don’t really know any short-term activist investors.
Lex Fridman
That’s a hopeful-
That’s a hopeful-
Bill Ackman
Not ones with credibility.
Not ones with credibility.
General Growth Properties
Lex Fridman
You mentioned general growth. I read somewhere called arguably one of the best hedge fund trades of all time. So I guess it went from $60 million to over 3 billion.
You mentioned general growth. I read somewhere called arguably one of the best hedge fund trades of all time. So I guess it went from $60 million to over 3 billion.
Bill Ackman
It was a good one.
It was a good one.
Lex Fridman
All right.
All right.
Bill Ackman
But it wasn’t a trade. I wouldn’t describe it as a trade. A trade is something you buy and you flip. This is something where we made the investment initially in November of 2008, and we still own a company. We spun off of general growth and it’s now 15 years later.
But it wasn’t a trade. I wouldn’t describe it as a trade. A trade is something you buy and you flip. This is something where we made the investment initially in November of 2008, and we still own a company. We spun off of general growth and it’s now 15 years later.
Lex Fridman
Can you describe what went into making that decision to actually increase the value of the company?
Can you describe what went into making that decision to actually increase the value of the company?
Bill Ackman
Sure. So this was at the time of the financial crisis, circa November 2008. Real estate’s always been a kind of sector that I’ve been interested in. I began my career in the real estate business working for my dad, actually arranging mortgages for real estate developers. So I have kind of deep ties and interest in the business and General Growth was the second-largest shopping mall company in the country. Simon Properties many people have heard of, General Growth was number two. They owned some of the best malls in the country. And at that time, people thought of shopping malls as these non disruptible things. Again, we talk about disruption. Malls have been disrupted in many ways and General Growth stock… General Growth the company, the CFO in particular was very aggressive in the way that he borrowed money. And he borrowed money from a kind of Wall Street, not long-term mortgages, but generally relatively short-term mortgages.
Sure. So this was at the time of the financial crisis, circa November 2008. Real estate’s always been a kind of sector that I’ve been interested in. I began my career in the real estate business working for my dad, actually arranging mortgages for real estate developers. So I have kind of deep ties and interest in the business and General Growth was the second-largest shopping mall company in the country. Simon Properties many people have heard of, General Growth was number two. They owned some of the best malls in the country. And at that time, people thought of shopping malls as these non disruptible things. Again, we talk about disruption. Malls have been disrupted in many ways and General Growth stock… General Growth the company, the CFO in particular was very aggressive in the way that he borrowed money. And he borrowed money from a kind of Wall Street, not long-term mortgages, but generally relatively short-term mortgages.
It was pretty aggressive. As the value went up, he would borrow more and more against the assets and that helped the short-term results of the business. The problem was during the financial crisis, the market for what’s called CMBS, commercial mortgage backed securities basically shut. And the company, because its debt was relatively short term, had a lot of big maturities coming up that they had no ability to refinance. And the market said, “Oh, my god, the lenders are going to foreclose and the shareholders going to get wiped, the company’s going to go bankrupt, they’re going to get wiped out.” The stock went from $63 a share to 34 cents. And there was a family, the Bucksbaum Family owned I think about 25% of the company, and they had a 5 billion of stock that was worth 25 billion or something by the time, we bought a stake in the business.
And what interested me was I thought the assets were worth substantially more than the liabilities. The company had 27 billion of debt and had a hundred million dollars value of the equity down from 20 billion. Okay? And one that sort of an interesting place to start with a stock down 99%. But the fundamental drivers, the mall business are occupancy. How occupied are the malls, occupancy was up year-on-year between ’07 and ’08. Interestingly, net operating income, which is kind of a measure of cash flow from the malls, that was up year-on-year. So kind of the underlying fundamentals were doing fine. The only problem they had is they had billions of dollars of debt that they had to repay, they couldn’t repay. And if you kind of examine the bankruptcy code, it’s precisely designed for a situation like this where it’s this resting place you can go to restructure your business.
Now the problem was that every other company that had gone bankrupt, the shareholders got wiped out. And so the market’s seeing every previous example, the shareholders get wiped out. The assumption is this stock is going to go to zero. But that’s not what the bankruptcy code says. What the bankruptcy code says is that the value gets portioned based on value. And if you could prove to a judge that there was the assets worth more than a liabilities, then the shareholders actually get to keep their investment in the company. And that was the bet we made. And so we stepped into the market and we bought 25% of the company in the open market for… We had to pay up. It started out at 34 cents, I think there were 300 million shares. So it was at a hundred million dollars value by the time we were done. We paid an average of… We paid 60 million for 25% of the business, so about $240 million for the equity of the company.
And then we had to get on the board to convince the directors the thing to do. And the board was in complete panic, didn’t know what to do, spending a ton of money on advisors. And I was a shareholder activist four years into Pershing Square, and no one had any idea what we were doing. They thought we were crazy. Every day we’d go into the market and we’d buy this penny stock and we’d file what’s called a 13D, every 1% increase in our stake. And people just thought we were crazy. We’re buying stock in a company that’s going to go bankrupt. “Bill, you’re going to lose all your money. Run.” And I said, “Well, wait, bankruptcy code says that if it’s more asset value than liabilities, we should be fine.” And the key moment, if you’re looking for fun moments is there’s a woman named Maddie Bucksbaum who’s from the Bucksbaum family.
And her cousin John was chairman of the board, CEO of the company. And as she calls me after we disclose our stake in the company, she’s like, “Bill Ackman, I’m really glad to see you here.” And I met her like… I don’t think it was a date, but I kind of met her in a social context when I was like 25 or something. And she said, “Look, I’m really glad to see you here and if there’s anything I can do to help you, call me.” I said, “Sure.” We kept trying to get on the board of the company. They wouldn’t invite us on, couldn’t really run a proxy contest, not with a company going bankrupt. And their advisors actually were Goldman Sachs…
Bill Ackman
… not with a company going bankrupt. And their advisors actually were Goldman Sachs and they’re like, “You don’t want the fox in the henhouse.” And they were listening to their advisors. I called Maddie up and I said, “Maddie, I need to get on the board of the company to help.” And she says, “You know what? I will call my cousin and I’ll get it done.” She calls back a few hours later, “You’ll be going onto the board.” I don’t know what she said because …
… not with a company going bankrupt. And their advisors actually were Goldman Sachs and they’re like, “You don’t want the fox in the henhouse.” And they were listening to their advisors. I called Maddie up and I said, “Maddie, I need to get on the board of the company to help.” And she says, “You know what? I will call my cousin and I’ll get it done.” She calls back a few hours later, “You’ll be going onto the board.” I don’t know what she said because …
Lex Fridman
Well, she was convincing.
Well, she was convincing.
Bill Ackman
Next thing you know, I’m invited on the board of the company, and the board is talking about the old equity of general growth. Old equity is what you talk about, “The shareholders are getting wiped out.” I said, “No, no, no. This board represents the current equity of the company and I’m a major shareholder. John’s a major shareholder. There’s plenty of asset value here. This company should be able to be restructured for the benefit of shareholders.” And we led a restructuring for the benefit of shareholders, and it took, let’s say eight months. And the company emerged from Chapter 11. We made an incremental investment into the company, and the shareholders kept the vast majority of their investment. All the creditors got their face amount of their investment par plus accrued interest, and it was a great outcome. All the employees kept their jobs, the mall stayed open, there was no liquidation.
Next thing you know, I’m invited on the board of the company, and the board is talking about the old equity of general growth. Old equity is what you talk about, “The shareholders are getting wiped out.” I said, “No, no, no. This board represents the current equity of the company and I’m a major shareholder. John’s a major shareholder. There’s plenty of asset value here. This company should be able to be restructured for the benefit of shareholders.” And we led a restructuring for the benefit of shareholders, and it took, let’s say eight months. And the company emerged from Chapter 11. We made an incremental investment into the company, and the shareholders kept the vast majority of their investment. All the creditors got their face amount of their investment par plus accrued interest, and it was a great outcome. All the employees kept their jobs, the mall stayed open, there was no liquidation.
The bankruptcy system worked the way it should. I was in court all the time and the first meeting with the judge, the judge is like, “Look, this would never have happened were it not for a financial crisis.” And once the judge said that, I knew we were going to be fine, because the company had really not done anything fundamentally wrong, maybe a little too aggressive in how they borrowed money. And stock went from 34 cents to $31 a share. And actually fun little anecdote, we made a lot of people a lot of money who followed us into it. I got a lot of nice thank you notes, which you get on occasion in this business, believe it or not. And then one day I get a voicemail, this is when there was something called voicemail, probably a few years later. And it’s a guy with a very thick Jamaican accent leaving a message for Bill Ackman.
I return all my calls, called the guy back. I said, “Hi, it’s Bill Ackman. I’m just returning your call.” He says, “Oh, Mr. Ackman, thank you so much for calling me.” And I said, “Oh, how can I help?” He says, “I wanted to thank you.” I said, “What do you mean?” He said, “I saw you on CNBC a couple of years ago and you were talking about this general growth and the stock.” I said, “Where was the stock at the time?” He said, “It’s 60 cents or something like this. And I bought a lot of stock.” And I’m like, “Well, how much did you invest?” ” Oh, I invest all of my money in the company.” And he was a New York City taxi driver and he invested like $50,000 or something like this at 60 cents a share. And he was still holding it. And he went into retirement and he made 50 times his money. And those are the moments that you feel pretty good about investing.
Lex Fridman
What gave you confidence through that? Went to a penny stock, and I’m sure you were getting a lot of naysayers and people saying that, “This is crazy.”
What gave you confidence through that? Went to a penny stock, and I’m sure you were getting a lot of naysayers and people saying that, “This is crazy.”
Bill Ackman
It’s the same thing. You just do the work. We got a lot of pushback from our investors actually because we had never invested in a bankrupt company before. It’s a field called distressed investing, and they’re dedicated distressed investors and we weren’t considered one of them. “Bill, what are you doing? You don’t know anything about distressed investing. You don’t know anything about bankruptcy investing.” But I can read.
It’s the same thing. You just do the work. We got a lot of pushback from our investors actually because we had never invested in a bankrupt company before. It’s a field called distressed investing, and they’re dedicated distressed investors and we weren’t considered one of them. “Bill, what are you doing? You don’t know anything about distressed investing. You don’t know anything about bankruptcy investing.” But I can read.
Lex Fridman
And you learned.
And you learned.
Bill Ackman
And I learned. And it sometimes is very helpful not to be a practitioner, an expert in something because you get used to the conventional wisdom. And so we just abstractly stepped back and look at the facts and it was just a really interesting setup for one of the best investments we ever made.
And I learned. And it sometimes is very helpful not to be a practitioner, an expert in something because you get used to the conventional wisdom. And so we just abstractly stepped back and look at the facts and it was just a really interesting setup for one of the best investments we ever made.
Lex Fridman
How hard is it to learn some of the legal aspects of this? Like you mentioned bankruptcy code. I imagine is very dense language and dense ideas and loopholes and all that kind of stuff. If you’re just stepping in and you’ve never done distressed investing, how hard is it to figure out?
How hard is it to learn some of the legal aspects of this? Like you mentioned bankruptcy code. I imagine is very dense language and dense ideas and loopholes and all that kind of stuff. If you’re just stepping in and you’ve never done distressed investing, how hard is it to figure out?
Bill Ackman
It’s not that hard. No, it’s not that hard.
It’s not that hard. No, it’s not that hard.
Lex Fridman
Okay.
Okay.
Bill Ackman
I literally read a book on distressed investing. Ben Branch or something on distressed investing.
I literally read a book on distressed investing. Ben Branch or something on distressed investing.
Lex Fridman
You were able to pick up the intuition from that. Just all the basic skills involved, the basic facts to know, all that kind of stuff?
You were able to pick up the intuition from that. Just all the basic skills involved, the basic facts to know, all that kind of stuff?
Bill Ackman
Most of the world’s knowledge has already been written somewhere. You just got to read the right books. And also had great lawyers. Built up some great relationships. We work with Sullivan & Cromwell, and the lawyer there named Joe Schenker who I met earlier in my career. Pershing Square was actually my second act in the hedge fund business. I started a fund called Gotham Partners when I was 26. One of my early investments was a company called Rockefeller Center Properties that was heading for bankruptcy. And the lawyer on the other side representing Goldman Sachs was a guy named Joe Schenker. He was an obvious phone call because we had yet another real estate bankruptcy.
Most of the world’s knowledge has already been written somewhere. You just got to read the right books. And also had great lawyers. Built up some great relationships. We work with Sullivan & Cromwell, and the lawyer there named Joe Schenker who I met earlier in my career. Pershing Square was actually my second act in the hedge fund business. I started a fund called Gotham Partners when I was 26. One of my early investments was a company called Rockefeller Center Properties that was heading for bankruptcy. And the lawyer on the other side representing Goldman Sachs was a guy named Joe Schenker. He was an obvious phone call because we had yet another real estate bankruptcy.
And that one we did very well, but I missed the big opportunity and I suffered severe psychological torture every time I walked by Rockefeller Center because we knew more about that property, anyone else, but I knew less about deal making and didn’t have the resources, and I was 28 years old or 27. And they hired a better lawyer than we did, and they outsmarted us on that one in a way. I said, “Okay, I’m going to go hire this guy the next time round.”
Lex Fridman
Okay. We’ll probably talk about Rockefeller Center and some failures, but first you said Fox in the henhouse, something that the board and the chairman were worried about. Why would they call you a fox? You keep saying activist investing, there’s nothing to worry about. It’s always good, mostly good. But that expression applied in this context, they were still worried about that.
Okay. We’ll probably talk about Rockefeller Center and some failures, but first you said Fox in the henhouse, something that the board and the chairman were worried about. Why would they call you a fox? You keep saying activist investing, there’s nothing to worry about. It’s always good, mostly good. But that expression applied in this context, they were still worried about that.
Bill Ackman
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
And so there’s a million questions here, but first of all, what is the process of getting on the board look like?
And so there’s a million questions here, but first of all, what is the process of getting on the board look like?
Bill Ackman
A board can always admit a member at any time in their discretion for a US company. Maybe there’s some jurisdiction where you need a shareholder vote, but in most cases a board can vote on any director that they want. If the board doesn’t invite you to the party, you have to apply to be a member in effect, and basically it’s the process of ultimately running a slate for a meeting where you propose a … Any shareholder can propose to be on a board of a company if they own a one share of stock in the business. And getting your name in the materials they sent to shareholders, those rules were written in a way that were very unfavorable and very difficult to get in the door.
A board can always admit a member at any time in their discretion for a US company. Maybe there’s some jurisdiction where you need a shareholder vote, but in most cases a board can vote on any director that they want. If the board doesn’t invite you to the party, you have to apply to be a member in effect, and basically it’s the process of ultimately running a slate for a meeting where you propose a … Any shareholder can propose to be on a board of a company if they own a one share of stock in the business. And getting your name in the materials they sent to shareholders, those rules were written in a way that were very unfavorable and very difficult to get in the door.
And those rules have been changed very recently where the company now has to include really all the candidates and the materials they sent to shareholders and the shareholders pick the best ones. When we ran proxy contests in the past, that was not the case. And so you have to spend a lot of money, mostly mailing fees and all kinds of other legal and other expenses to let everyone know you’re running, like running a political campaign. And then you got to run around and meet with the big shareholders, fly around the country, explain your case to them, and then there’s a shareholder meeting. And if you get a majority of the votes, you get on.
Lex Fridman
What’s this proxy contest/battle idea, what’s the-
What’s this proxy contest/battle idea, what’s the-
Bill Ackman
The battle comes when they don’t want you to get on. And a lot of that has to do with I would say, pride, normal human stuff. A lot of times a board of an underperforming company doesn’t want to admit that they’ve underperformed. And boards of directors 20 years ago when we started Pershing Square, were pretty cushy jobs. Sit on a board of a company, you play golf with the CEO at nice golf courses, you make a few hundred thousand dollars a year to go to four meetings. It was kind of a rubber stamp world where, at the end of the day, the CEO really ran the show. Once shareholders could actually dislodge board members and they could lose their seats, and that’s really the rise of shareholder activism, boards started taking their responsibilities much more seriously. Because directors are typically … in many cases, they’re retired CEOs. This is how they’re making a living in the later part of their career.
The battle comes when they don’t want you to get on. And a lot of that has to do with I would say, pride, normal human stuff. A lot of times a board of an underperforming company doesn’t want to admit that they’ve underperformed. And boards of directors 20 years ago when we started Pershing Square, were pretty cushy jobs. Sit on a board of a company, you play golf with the CEO at nice golf courses, you make a few hundred thousand dollars a year to go to four meetings. It was kind of a rubber stamp world where, at the end of the day, the CEO really ran the show. Once shareholders could actually dislodge board members and they could lose their seats, and that’s really the rise of shareholder activism, boards started taking their responsibilities much more seriously. Because directors are typically … in many cases, they’re retired CEOs. This is how they’re making a living in the later part of their career.
They’ll sit on four boards, they collect a million, a million and a half dollars a year in director’s fees. If they get thrown off the board by the shareholders, that’s embarrassing obviously and it affects their ability to get on other boards. Again, incentives, as I said earlier, drive all human behavior. The incentives of directors, they want to preserve their board seats. Now the directors on board serve in various roles. The most vulnerable ones are ones who, for example, chair a compensation committee. And if they put in a bad plan or they overpaid management, they’re subject to attack by shareholders. But these contests are not dissimilar to political contests, where there’s mudslinging and the other side puts out false information about you and you have to respond and they’re spending the shareholders’ money, so they have sort of unlimited resources. And you’re spending your and your investors’ money, when you’re a small firm, finite resources. They can outspend you, they can sue you, they can try to jigger the mechanics in such a way that you’re going to lose. There’s some unfortunate stuff that’s happened in the past, some manipulative stuff.
Lex Fridman
Also some stuff that’s public like in the press and all this kind of stuff?
Also some stuff that’s public like in the press and all this kind of stuff?
Bill Ackman
Oh, of course. There’ll be articles about … In the dirty days where they would go through your trash and make sure that you’re not sleeping around and things like this. But that’s okay. I can survive extreme scrutiny because I’ve been through this for a long time.
Oh, of course. There’ll be articles about … In the dirty days where they would go through your trash and make sure that you’re not sleeping around and things like this. But that’s okay. I can survive extreme scrutiny because I’ve been through this for a long time.
Lex Fridman
You’re saying the fat and happy hens can get very wolf-like when the fox is trying to break in? Is this how we extend this metaphor?
You’re saying the fat and happy hens can get very wolf-like when the fox is trying to break in? Is this how we extend this metaphor?
Bill Ackman
Well, the fox is a threat to the hens.
Well, the fox is a threat to the hens.
Lex Fridman
But the charismatic fox just explained to me why the fox is good for everybody in the henhouse.
But the charismatic fox just explained to me why the fox is good for everybody in the henhouse.
Bill Ackman
At the end of the day, it’s actually very good on a board to have someone … There are many examples over time and some handful of high profile ones where the board fought tooth and nail to keep the activists off the board. And then once the activists got on the board and they said, “This guy’s not so bad after all. The shareholders voted him on. He’s got some decent ideas and let’s all work together to have this work out.” And so there are very few cases where after the contest … And by the way, sometimes you have to replace the entire board. We’ve done that. But in most cases you got a couple of seats on the board, and it’s just you want to build a board comprised of diverse points of view. And that’s how you get to the truth.
At the end of the day, it’s actually very good on a board to have someone … There are many examples over time and some handful of high profile ones where the board fought tooth and nail to keep the activists off the board. And then once the activists got on the board and they said, “This guy’s not so bad after all. The shareholders voted him on. He’s got some decent ideas and let’s all work together to have this work out.” And so there are very few cases where after the contest … And by the way, sometimes you have to replace the entire board. We’ve done that. But in most cases you got a couple of seats on the board, and it’s just you want to build a board comprised of diverse points of view. And that’s how you get to the truth.
Canadian Pacific Railway
Lex Fridman
What was the most dramatic battle for the board that you have been a part of?
What was the most dramatic battle for the board that you have been a part of?
Bill Ackman
The Canadian Pacific Proxy contest. Canadian Pacific was considered the most iconic company in Canada. It literally built the country because the rail that got built over Canada is what united the various provinces into a country. And then over time, because the railroad business is a pretty good business, they built a ton of hotels, they owned a lot of real estate, and it became this massive conglomerate, but it was horribly mismanaged for decades. By the time we got involved, it was by far the worst run railroad in North America. They had the lowest profit margins, they had the lowest growth rate. Every quarter management would make excuses, generally about the weather as to why they underperformed versus … And there there’s a direct competitor, a company called Canadian National, has a rail goes right across the country. And Canadian Pacific would constantly be complaining about the weather.
The Canadian Pacific Proxy contest. Canadian Pacific was considered the most iconic company in Canada. It literally built the country because the rail that got built over Canada is what united the various provinces into a country. And then over time, because the railroad business is a pretty good business, they built a ton of hotels, they owned a lot of real estate, and it became this massive conglomerate, but it was horribly mismanaged for decades. By the time we got involved, it was by far the worst run railroad in North America. They had the lowest profit margins, they had the lowest growth rate. Every quarter management would make excuses, generally about the weather as to why they underperformed versus … And there there’s a direct competitor, a company called Canadian National, has a rail goes right across the country. And Canadian Pacific would constantly be complaining about the weather.
And basically same country, same regions, the tracks weren’t that far apart. But it was a really important company and being on this board was like an honorary thing. And everyone on the board was an icon of Canada. The chairman of the Royal Bank of Canada, the head of the most important privately held grain company, an important collection of big time Canadian executives. Here we were, this is probably about 13 years ago, and still maybe a 44-year-old from New York, not a Canadian basically saying, “This is the worst run railroad North America.” And we bought 12% of the railroad at a really low price and we brought with us to our first meeting, the greatest railroader ever, a guy named Hunter Harrison who had turned around Canadian National. We’re like, “Okay, we’ve got a great asset. We’ve got the greatest railroad CEO of all time. He’s come out of retirement to step in and run the railroad.” And we brought him to the first meeting and they wouldn’t even meet with him, and they certainly weren’t going to consider hiring him. And that led us to a proxy contest.
Lex Fridman
And this is where the engine starts churning to figure out how this contest can be won. What’s involved?
And this is where the engine starts churning to figure out how this contest can be won. What’s involved?
Bill Ackman
Well the key is we had to one come up with a group of directors who would be willing to step into a battle. And we didn’t want a bunch of New York directors or even American directors, we wanted Canadians. The problem was this was the most iconic company in Canada and we wanted high profile people. We talked to all the high profile people in Canada. Every one of them would say, “Bill, you’re entirely right. This thing is the worst run railroad. It needs to be fixed. But I see John at the club. I see him at the Toronto Club. I can’t do this, but you’re totally right.” And that was the concern because you have to file your materials by a certain day, you got to put together a slate. We needed a big slate because we knew that we had to replace basically all the directors.
Well the key is we had to one come up with a group of directors who would be willing to step into a battle. And we didn’t want a bunch of New York directors or even American directors, we wanted Canadians. The problem was this was the most iconic company in Canada and we wanted high profile people. We talked to all the high profile people in Canada. Every one of them would say, “Bill, you’re entirely right. This thing is the worst run railroad. It needs to be fixed. But I see John at the club. I see him at the Toronto Club. I can’t do this, but you’re totally right.” And that was the concern because you have to file your materials by a certain day, you got to put together a slate. We needed a big slate because we knew that we had to replace basically all the directors.
And then I spoke to a guy who was one of the wealthiest guys in Canada who was on the board at one point in time. And he said, “Bill, I have an idea for you. There’s this woman, Rebecca McDonald, why don’t you give her a call?” And I called Rebecca and she was the first woman to take a company public in Canada as CEO. And she was an anti-establishment, not afraid to take on anything kind of person. And I called her, we had a great conversation and she was in the Dominican Republic at her house and I flew down to see her and she said, “Yeah, I’m all in.” And actually, once we got her, that enabled us to get others. And then we put together our slate and we had some pretty interesting dialogue with the company. They tried to embarrass us all the time.
Lex Fridman
In the press publicly? What are talking about?
In the press publicly? What are talking about?
Bill Ackman
Press publicly. At one point I wrote an email saying, “Look, let’s come to peace on this thing, but if we don’t, you’re really forcing my hand and we’re going to have to rent the largest hall in Toronto and invite all the shareholders and it’s going to be embarrassing for management.” And I made reference to some nuclear winter, “Let’s not have it be a nuclear winter.” And they thought they’d embarrass me by releasing the email, but it only inspired us. And we rented the largest hall in Canada and we put up a presentation walking through, “Here’s Canadian National. Here’s Canadian Pacific. Here’s what they said. Here’s what they did.” And then we had Hunter get up who was this incredibly charismatic guy from Tennessee. He’s like a lion, incredibly deep voice, unbelievable track record, incredibly respected guy. It’s like getting Michael Jordan to come out of retirement and come run the company.
Press publicly. At one point I wrote an email saying, “Look, let’s come to peace on this thing, but if we don’t, you’re really forcing my hand and we’re going to have to rent the largest hall in Toronto and invite all the shareholders and it’s going to be embarrassing for management.” And I made reference to some nuclear winter, “Let’s not have it be a nuclear winter.” And they thought they’d embarrass me by releasing the email, but it only inspired us. And we rented the largest hall in Canada and we put up a presentation walking through, “Here’s Canadian National. Here’s Canadian Pacific. Here’s what they said. Here’s what they did.” And then we had Hunter get up who was this incredibly charismatic guy from Tennessee. He’s like a lion, incredibly deep voice, unbelievable track record, incredibly respected guy. It’s like getting Michael Jordan to come out of retirement and come run the company.
And Hunter was incredible, and Paul Lau, other members of my team were super engaged. And Canadians are known to be nice, so one of the problems we had is shareholders would never tell management or the board that they were losing. It was not until the night before the meeting when the vote came in, that management realized that they lost. We got 99% of the vote. And they begged us to take a deal. They said, “Look, we’ll resign tonight so that we don’t have to come to the meeting tomorrow.” That’s how embarrassed they were. But that was kind of an interesting one.
Lex Fridman
In both this proxy battle and the company itself, this was one of your more successful investments?
In both this proxy battle and the company itself, this was one of your more successful investments?
Bill Ackman
It was. The stock’s up about 10 times and it’s an industrial company. It’s a railroad. It’s not Google. So it’s a great story. And the company’s now run by a guy named Keith Creel. And Keith was Hunter’s protege, and in many ways he’s actually better than Hunter. He’s doing an incredible job. And the sad part here is we did very well, we tripled our money over several years and then I went through a very challenging period because of a couple of bad investments, and we had to sell our Canadian Pacific to raise capital to pay for investors who are leaving. But we had another opportunity to buy it back in the last couple of years. And so we’re now again a major owner of the company. But had we held onto original stock, it would’ve been epic, if you will.
It was. The stock’s up about 10 times and it’s an industrial company. It’s a railroad. It’s not Google. So it’s a great story. And the company’s now run by a guy named Keith Creel. And Keith was Hunter’s protege, and in many ways he’s actually better than Hunter. He’s doing an incredible job. And the sad part here is we did very well, we tripled our money over several years and then I went through a very challenging period because of a couple of bad investments, and we had to sell our Canadian Pacific to raise capital to pay for investors who are leaving. But we had another opportunity to buy it back in the last couple of years. And so we’re now again a major owner of the company. But had we held onto original stock, it would’ve been epic, if you will.
Lex Fridman
On this one, you were right.
On this one, you were right.
Bill Ackman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
And I read an article about you, and there’s many articles about you. I read an article that said, Bill is often right, but you approach it with a scorched earth approach that can often do damage.
And I read an article about you, and there’s many articles about you. I read an article that said, Bill is often right, but you approach it with a scorched earth approach that can often do damage.
Bill Ackman
I haven’t read the often right article, but the good news is we are often right, and I say we because we’re a team, a small team, but fortunately a very successful one. Our batting average as investors is extremely high. And the good news is our record’s totally public. You can see everything we’ve ever done. But the press doesn’t generally write about the success stories, they write about the failures. And so we’ve had some epic failures, big losses. The good news is they’ve been a tiny minority of the cases now. No one likes to lose money. It’s even worse to lose other people’s money. And I’ve done that occasionally. The good news is if you’ve stuck with us, you’ve done very well over a long time.
I haven’t read the often right article, but the good news is we are often right, and I say we because we’re a team, a small team, but fortunately a very successful one. Our batting average as investors is extremely high. And the good news is our record’s totally public. You can see everything we’ve ever done. But the press doesn’t generally write about the success stories, they write about the failures. And so we’ve had some epic failures, big losses. The good news is they’ve been a tiny minority of the cases now. No one likes to lose money. It’s even worse to lose other people’s money. And I’ve done that occasionally. The good news is if you’ve stuck with us, you’ve done very well over a long time.
OpenAI
Lex Fridman
On a small tangent since we were talking about boards. Did you get a chance to see what happened with the OpenAI board? Because I’m talking to Sam Altman soon. Is there any insight you have, just maybe lessons you draw from these kinds of events, especially with an AI technology company, such dramatic things happening?
On a small tangent since we were talking about boards. Did you get a chance to see what happened with the OpenAI board? Because I’m talking to Sam Altman soon. Is there any insight you have, just maybe lessons you draw from these kinds of events, especially with an AI technology company, such dramatic things happening?
Bill Ackman
Yeah, that was an incredible story. Look, governance really matters, and the governance structure of OpenAI, I think leaves something to be desired. I think Sam’s point was, and maybe Elon Musk’s point originally set up as a nonprofit. And it reminds me actually, I invested in a nonprofit run by a former Facebook founder where he was going to create a Facebook-like entity for nonprofits to promote goodness in the world. And the problem was he couldn’t hire the talent he wanted because he couldn’t grant stock options, he couldn’t pay market salaries. And ultimately he ended up selling the business to a for-profit.
Yeah, that was an incredible story. Look, governance really matters, and the governance structure of OpenAI, I think leaves something to be desired. I think Sam’s point was, and maybe Elon Musk’s point originally set up as a nonprofit. And it reminds me actually, I invested in a nonprofit run by a former Facebook founder where he was going to create a Facebook-like entity for nonprofits to promote goodness in the world. And the problem was he couldn’t hire the talent he wanted because he couldn’t grant stock options, he couldn’t pay market salaries. And ultimately he ended up selling the business to a for-profit.
It taught me for-profit solutions to problems are much better than nonprofits. And here you had kind of a blend. It was set up as a nonprofit, but I think they found the same thing. They couldn’t hire the talent they wanted without having a for-profit subsidiary. But the nonprofit entity, as I understand it, owns a big chunk of OpenAI, and the investors own a capped interest where their upside is capped and they don’t have representation on the board. And I think that was a setup for a problem, and that’s clearly what happened here.
Lex Fridman
And there’s, I guess some kind of complexity in the governance. Because of this nonprofit and cap profit thing, it seems like there’s a bunch of complexity and non-standard aspects to it that perhaps also contributed to the problem?
And there’s, I guess some kind of complexity in the governance. Because of this nonprofit and cap profit thing, it seems like there’s a bunch of complexity and non-standard aspects to it that perhaps also contributed to the problem?
Bill Ackman
Yeah. Governance really matters. Boards of directors really matter. Giving the shareholders the right to have input at least once a year on the structure of the governance of companies is really important. And private venture backed boards are also not ideal. I’m an active investor in ventures, and there are some complicated issues that emerge in private and venture stage companies where board members have somewhat divergent incentives from the long-term owners of a business. And what you see a lot in venture boards is they’re presided over generally by venture capital investors who are big investors in the company. And oftentimes it’s more important to them to have the public perception that they’re good directors so they get the next best deal. If they have a reputation for taking on management too aggressively, word will get out in the small community of founders and they’ll miss the next Google. And so their interests are not just in that particular company. That’s also one of the problems. Again, it all comes back to incentives.
Yeah. Governance really matters. Boards of directors really matter. Giving the shareholders the right to have input at least once a year on the structure of the governance of companies is really important. And private venture backed boards are also not ideal. I’m an active investor in ventures, and there are some complicated issues that emerge in private and venture stage companies where board members have somewhat divergent incentives from the long-term owners of a business. And what you see a lot in venture boards is they’re presided over generally by venture capital investors who are big investors in the company. And oftentimes it’s more important to them to have the public perception that they’re good directors so they get the next best deal. If they have a reputation for taking on management too aggressively, word will get out in the small community of founders and they’ll miss the next Google. And so their interests are not just in that particular company. That’s also one of the problems. Again, it all comes back to incentives.
Lex Fridman
Can you explain to me the difference venture backed VCs and shareholders? This means before the company goes public?
Can you explain to me the difference venture backed VCs and shareholders? This means before the company goes public?
Bill Ackman
Yeah. Private venture backed companies, the boards tend to be very small. It could be a handful of the venture investors and management. They’re often very rarely independent directors. It’s just not an ideal structure.
Yeah. Private venture backed companies, the boards tend to be very small. It could be a handful of the venture investors and management. They’re often very rarely independent directors. It’s just not an ideal structure.
Lex Fridman
Oh, I see. You want independent?
Oh, I see. You want independent?
Bill Ackman
It’s beneficial to have people who have an economic interest in the business and they care only about the success of that company, as opposed to someone who … If you think about the venture business, getting into the best deals is more important than any one deal. And you see cases where the boards go along with, in some cases, bad behavior on the part of management because they want a reputation for being a founder friendly director. That’s kind of problematic. You don’t have the same issue in public company boards.
It’s beneficial to have people who have an economic interest in the business and they care only about the success of that company, as opposed to someone who … If you think about the venture business, getting into the best deals is more important than any one deal. And you see cases where the boards go along with, in some cases, bad behavior on the part of management because they want a reputation for being a founder friendly director. That’s kind of problematic. You don’t have the same issue in public company boards.
Lex Fridman
We talked about some of the big wins and your a track record, but you said there were some big losses. What’s the biggest loss of your career?
We talked about some of the big wins and your a track record, but you said there were some big losses. What’s the biggest loss of your career?
Biggest loss and lowest point
Bill Ackman
Biggest loss in my career is a company called Valiant Pharmaceuticals. We made an investment in business that didn’t meet our core principles. The problem in the pharmaceutical industry, and there are many problems as I’ve learned, is it’s a very volatile business. It’s based on drug discovery. It’s based on predicting the future revenues of a drug before it goes off patent. Lots of complexities. And we thought we had found a pharmaceutical company we could own because of a very unusual founder in the way he approached this business. It was a company where another activist was on the board of directors of the company and governing and overseeing the day-to-day decisions, and we ended up making a passive investment in the company. And up until this point in time, we really didn’t make passive investments, and the company made a series of decisions that were disastrous and then we stepped in to try to solve the problem. It was the first time I ever joined a board, and the mess was much larger than I realized from the outside and then I was kind of stuck. And it was very much a confidence sensitive strategy because they built their business by acquiring pharmaceutical assets, and they often issued stock when they acquired targets. Once the market lost confidence in management, the stock price got crushed and it impaired their ability to continue to acquire low cost drugs. And we lost $4 billion.
Biggest loss in my career is a company called Valiant Pharmaceuticals. We made an investment in business that didn’t meet our core principles. The problem in the pharmaceutical industry, and there are many problems as I’ve learned, is it’s a very volatile business. It’s based on drug discovery. It’s based on predicting the future revenues of a drug before it goes off patent. Lots of complexities. And we thought we had found a pharmaceutical company we could own because of a very unusual founder in the way he approached this business. It was a company where another activist was on the board of directors of the company and governing and overseeing the day-to-day decisions, and we ended up making a passive investment in the company. And up until this point in time, we really didn’t make passive investments, and the company made a series of decisions that were disastrous and then we stepped in to try to solve the problem. It was the first time I ever joined a board, and the mess was much larger than I realized from the outside and then I was kind of stuck. And it was very much a confidence sensitive strategy because they built their business by acquiring pharmaceutical assets, and they often issued stock when they acquired targets. Once the market lost confidence in management, the stock price got crushed and it impaired their ability to continue to acquire low cost drugs. And we lost $4 billion.
Lex Fridman
$4 billion.
$4 billion.
Bill Ackman
How’s that for a big loss? That’s up there.
How’s that for a big loss? That’s up there.
Lex Fridman
I’m sweating this whole conversation, both the wins and the losses and the stakes involved.
I’m sweating this whole conversation, both the wins and the losses and the stakes involved.
Bill Ackman
And by the way, that loss catalyzed other, what I call mark to market losses. Very high profile, huge number, disastrous press. Then people said, “Okay, Bill’s going to go out of business, so we’re going to bet against everything he’s doing. And we know his entire portfolio because we only own 10 things.” And we were short a company called Herbalife. Very famously, we’ve only really shorted two companies. The first one, there’s a book, the second one, there’s a movie. We no longer short companies. People pushed up the price of Herbalife, which when you’re a short seller, that’s catastrophic. I can explain that.
And by the way, that loss catalyzed other, what I call mark to market losses. Very high profile, huge number, disastrous press. Then people said, “Okay, Bill’s going to go out of business, so we’re going to bet against everything he’s doing. And we know his entire portfolio because we only own 10 things.” And we were short a company called Herbalife. Very famously, we’ve only really shorted two companies. The first one, there’s a book, the second one, there’s a movie. We no longer short companies. People pushed up the price of Herbalife, which when you’re a short seller, that’s catastrophic. I can explain that.
And then they also shorted the other stocks that we owned. And so that Valiant loss led to an overall more than 30% loss in the value of our portfolio. The Valiant loss was real and was crystallized. We ended up selling the position taking that loss. Most of the other losses were what I would call mark to market losses that were temporary. But many people go out of business because as I mentioned before, large move in a price, if investors are redeeming or you have leverage can put you out of business. And if people assumed if we got put out of business, we’d have to sell everything or cover our short position, and that would make the losses even worse. Wall Street is kind of ruthless.
Lex Fridman
They can make money off of that whole thing?
They can make money off of that whole thing?
Bill Ackman
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Lex Fridman
They used the opportunity of Valiant to try to destroy you reputation, financially, and then capitalize and make money off of that?
They used the opportunity of Valiant to try to destroy you reputation, financially, and then capitalize and make money off of that?
Bill Ackman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Wow, that’s a terrifying spot to be in. What was it like going through that?
Wow, that’s a terrifying spot to be in. What was it like going through that?
Bill Ackman
I was pretty grim. It’s actually much worse than that because I had a lot of stuff going on personally as well, and these things tend to be correlated. The Valiant mistake came at a time where I was contemplating my marriage. The problem with the hedge fund business is when you get to a certain scale, the CEO becomes like the chief marketing officer of the business, and I’m really an investor as opposed to a marketing guy. But when you have investors who give you a few hundred million dollars, they want to see you once a year, “Bill, I’d love to see you for an hour.” But if you’ve got a couple hundred of those, you find yourself on a plane to the Middle East, to Asia, flying around the country. This is pre Zoom, and that takes you away from the investment process.
I was pretty grim. It’s actually much worse than that because I had a lot of stuff going on personally as well, and these things tend to be correlated. The Valiant mistake came at a time where I was contemplating my marriage. The problem with the hedge fund business is when you get to a certain scale, the CEO becomes like the chief marketing officer of the business, and I’m really an investor as opposed to a marketing guy. But when you have investors who give you a few hundred million dollars, they want to see you once a year, “Bill, I’d love to see you for an hour.” But if you’ve got a couple hundred of those, you find yourself on a plane to the Middle East, to Asia, flying around the country. This is pre Zoom, and that takes you away from the investment process.
You have to delegate more. That was a contributor to the Valiant mistake. Now we lose a ton of money on Valiant. My ex-wife and I were talking about separating, getting divorced. I put that on hold because I didn’t want to make a decision in the middle of this crisis, and things just kept getting worse. We were also sued. When you lose a lot of money … we didn’t get sued by our investors, but we got sued by a shareholder because when the stock price goes down, shareholders sue. We’d done nothing wrong other than make a big mistake. So you have litigation, your investors are taking their money out. I’m in the middle of a divorce. The divorce starts to proceed. My ex-wife’s lawyer’s expectations of what my net worth was was about three times what it actually was, and it was going lower right in the middle of this. And I remember the lawyer saying, “Look, Bill, we’ve estimate your net worth at X, but don’t worry, we only want a third.” But X was 3X, so a third was 100%.
And then I had litigation. And actually never before publicly disclosed, and I’ll share it with you now. We had a public company that owned about a third of our portfolio that was call it, our version of Berkshire Hathaway. I tried to learn from Mr. Buffet over time, and it was so to speak, permanent capital. The problem with hedge funds is people can take their money out every quarter. What Buffet has is a company where if people want to take their money out, they sell the stock, but the money stays. We set up a similar structure in October of 2014, and then a year later, Valiant happens, and then a year later we’re in the middle of the mess and we’re still in the mess. By mid 2017, we’ve got litigation underway, and another activist investor, a firm called Elliot Associates, which is run by a guy named Paul Singer, took a big position in our public company that was the bulk of our capital, and they shorted all the stocks that we owned.
And they probably went long the short that we were short, and they were making a bet that we’d be forced to liquidate and then they would make money on … Our public company was trading at a discount to what all the securities were worth. They bought the public company, they shorted the securities, and then they came to see us to try to be activists and force us to liquidate and that sort of-
Lex Fridman
Wow.
Wow.
Bill Ackman
I envisioned an end where the divorce takes all of my resources, the permanent capital vehicle ends up getting liquidated, and another activist in my industry puts me out of business. And I had met Neri Oxman right around this time, and I’d fallen completely in love with her. And I was envisioning a world where I was bankrupt, a judge found me guilty of whatever, he sends me off to jail … of course not that judge because he was a civil judge, but another judge sues the SEC, Department of Justice, and I find myself in this incredible mess. And I decided I didn’t want things to end that way.
I envisioned an end where the divorce takes all of my resources, the permanent capital vehicle ends up getting liquidated, and another activist in my industry puts me out of business. And I had met Neri Oxman right around this time, and I’d fallen completely in love with her. And I was envisioning a world where I was bankrupt, a judge found me guilty of whatever, he sends me off to jail … of course not that judge because he was a civil judge, but another judge sues the SEC, Department of Justice, and I find myself in this incredible mess. And I decided I didn’t want things to end that way.
I did something I’d never done before. I talked about it before about that you don’t borrow money, but I borrowed money and I borrowed $300 million from JP Morgan in the middle of this mess. And I give JP Morgan enormous credit in seeing through it. And also I had been a good client over a long period of time, and it’s like it’s a handshake bank and they bet that I would succeed. And I took that money to buy enough stock in my public company that I could prevent an activist from taking over and I could effectively buy control of our little public company.
And I got that done, and that I knew was the moment, the turning point. And I resolved my divorce, and divorces get easier to resolve when things are going badly. I was able to resolve that. We settled the litigation. I was buying blocks of our stock in the market. I remember a day I bought a big block of stock in the market, and I get a call from Gordon Singer, who is Paul Singer’s son, who runs their London part of their business. And he’s like, “Bill, was that you buying that block?” I said, “Yes.” And he’s like, “Fuck.”
Lex Fridman
So he knew-
So he knew-
Bill Ackman
He knew that once I got that they were not going to be able to succeed, and they went away. And that was the bottom. And that we’ve had an incredible run since then.
He knew that once I got that they were not going to be able to succeed, and they went away. And that was the bottom. And that we’ve had an incredible run since then.
Lex Fridman
And then you were able to protect your reputation from the Valiant failure still?
And then you were able to protect your reputation from the Valiant failure still?
Bill Ackman
This is a business where you’re going to make some mistakes. It was a big one. It was very reputationally damaging. The press-
This is a business where you’re going to make some mistakes. It was a big one. It was very reputationally damaging. The press-
Bill Ackman
… was a big one. It was very reputationally damaging. The press was a total disaster, but I’m not a quitter. And actually the key moments for us, we’d never taken our core investment principles and actually really written them down, something we talked about at meetings, kind of our investment team meetings. I had a member of the team, I said, “Look, go find a big piece of granite and a chisel and let’s take those core principles. I want them Moses’ 10 Commandments. Okay, we’re going to chisel them and then we’re going to put it up on the wall.” And once we produce those, we put one on everyone’s desk. I said, “Look, if we ever again veer from the core principles, hit me with a baseball bat.” And that was the bottom. And ever since then, we’ve had the best six years in the history of the firm.
… was a big one. It was very reputationally damaging. The press was a total disaster, but I’m not a quitter. And actually the key moments for us, we’d never taken our core investment principles and actually really written them down, something we talked about at meetings, kind of our investment team meetings. I had a member of the team, I said, “Look, go find a big piece of granite and a chisel and let’s take those core principles. I want them Moses’ 10 Commandments. Okay, we’re going to chisel them and then we’re going to put it up on the wall.” And once we produce those, we put one on everyone’s desk. I said, “Look, if we ever again veer from the core principles, hit me with a baseball bat.” And that was the bottom. And ever since then, we’ve had the best six years in the history of the firm.
Lex Fridman
So refocus on the fundamentals. That’s a hell of a story.
So refocus on the fundamentals. That’s a hell of a story.
Bill Ackman
And love helps. Love helps. I literally met Neri at the absolute bottom. Our first date was September 7th of 2017. That was very close to the bottom. Actually, there’s one other element to the story. So this went on for a few months after I met her. The other element is that one day I got a call from Neri. She’s like, “Bill, guess what?” I’m like, “What?” “Brad Pitt is coming to the Media Lab. He wants to see my work.” I’m like, “That’s beautiful, sweetheart. I didn’t know Brad Pitt was interested in your work.”
And love helps. Love helps. I literally met Neri at the absolute bottom. Our first date was September 7th of 2017. That was very close to the bottom. Actually, there’s one other element to the story. So this went on for a few months after I met her. The other element is that one day I got a call from Neri. She’s like, “Bill, guess what?” I’m like, “What?” “Brad Pitt is coming to the Media Lab. He wants to see my work.” I’m like, “That’s beautiful, sweetheart. I didn’t know Brad Pitt was interested in your work.”
Lex Fridman
As a man, that’s a difficult phone call to take.
As a man, that’s a difficult phone call to take.
Bill Ackman
And apparently he’s really interested in architecture. I’m like, “Okay.” Now, Neri and I were like, we would WhatsApp all day every day, we talk throughout the day. Brad Pitt shows up at the Media Lab at 10 o’clock. I talk to her in the morning. I kind of text her to see how things are going, don’t hear back. And on WhatsApp, you can see whether the other person’s read it or not.
And apparently he’s really interested in architecture. I’m like, “Okay.” Now, Neri and I were like, we would WhatsApp all day every day, we talk throughout the day. Brad Pitt shows up at the Media Lab at 10 o’clock. I talk to her in the morning. I kind of text her to see how things are going, don’t hear back. And on WhatsApp, you can see whether the other person’s read it or not.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Bill Ackman
Okay, no response. A couple of hours later, send her another text, no response. Six o’clock, no response. Eight o’clock, no response, 10 o’clock, no response. And she finally calls me at 10:30 and tells me how great Brad Pitt is. So I had this scenario, okay, a judge is going to find me. We’re going to lose to the judge. All my assets will disappear. And then Brad Pitt’s going to take my girlfriend. [inaudible 01:35:09].
Okay, no response. A couple of hours later, send her another text, no response. Six o’clock, no response. Eight o’clock, no response, 10 o’clock, no response. And she finally calls me at 10:30 and tells me how great Brad Pitt is. So I had this scenario, okay, a judge is going to find me. We’re going to lose to the judge. All my assets will disappear. And then Brad Pitt’s going to take my girlfriend. [inaudible 01:35:09].
Lex Fridman
Yeah, Brad Pitt’s your competition. This is great.
Yeah, Brad Pitt’s your competition. This is great.
Bill Ackman
So it was like a moment. That was sort of the bottom. And then sort of the motivational thing. I didn’t want to lose to an activist, didn’t want to lose my girl to some other guy.
So it was like a moment. That was sort of the bottom. And then sort of the motivational thing. I didn’t want to lose to an activist, didn’t want to lose my girl to some other guy.
Lex Fridman
Brad Pitt, and you emerged from all of that, the winner on all fronts.
Brad Pitt, and you emerged from all of that, the winner on all fronts.
Bill Ackman
I’m a very fortunate guy, very fortunate and lucky.
I’m a very fortunate guy, very fortunate and lucky.
Lex Fridman
You talked about some of the technical aspects of that, but psychologically, what are you doing at night by yourself?
You talked about some of the technical aspects of that, but psychologically, what are you doing at night by yourself?
Bill Ackman
That was a hard time, hard time because I was separated from my wife and my kids. I was living in not the greatest apartment. I had a beautiful home. And so I had to go find a bachelor place and I didn’t want to be away from my kids. I moved 10 blocks away and I wasn’t seeing them and they didn’t like it. So I ended up buying an apartment I didn’t like in the same building as my kids with a different entrance so I could be near them. But I was home alone. I got a dog that was Babar. We call him Babar, not the elephant. He’s a black Labradoodle.
That was a hard time, hard time because I was separated from my wife and my kids. I was living in not the greatest apartment. I had a beautiful home. And so I had to go find a bachelor place and I didn’t want to be away from my kids. I moved 10 blocks away and I wasn’t seeing them and they didn’t like it. So I ended up buying an apartment I didn’t like in the same building as my kids with a different entrance so I could be near them. But I was home alone. I got a dog that was Babar. We call him Babar, not the elephant. He’s a black Labradoodle.
Lex Fridman
Nice.
Nice.
Bill Ackman
He was supposed to be a mini, but he’s not so as mini. But I got him at six weeks old and he would keep me company. And I started meditating actually. And a friend recommended TM. And I would meditate 20 minutes in the morning, 20 minutes in the evening. And I also a big believer in exercise and weightlifting and I play tennis. And I had been… This is not my first proximity to disaster. I had another moment in my career, like 2002, and I learned this method for dealing with these kind of moments, which is you just make a little progress every day. So today, I’m going to wake up, I’m going to make progress. I’ll make progress in the litigation, I’ll make progress in the portfolio. I’ll make progress with my life. And progress compounds a bit like money compounds. You don’t see a lot of progress in the first few weeks, but 30 days in like, oh, okay. You can’t look up at the mountaintop where you used to be because then you’ll give up.
He was supposed to be a mini, but he’s not so as mini. But I got him at six weeks old and he would keep me company. And I started meditating actually. And a friend recommended TM. And I would meditate 20 minutes in the morning, 20 minutes in the evening. And I also a big believer in exercise and weightlifting and I play tennis. And I had been… This is not my first proximity to disaster. I had another moment in my career, like 2002, and I learned this method for dealing with these kind of moments, which is you just make a little progress every day. So today, I’m going to wake up, I’m going to make progress. I’ll make progress in the litigation, I’ll make progress in the portfolio. I’ll make progress with my life. And progress compounds a bit like money compounds. You don’t see a lot of progress in the first few weeks, but 30 days in like, oh, okay. You can’t look up at the mountaintop where you used to be because then you’ll give up.
But you just, okay, just make step by step by step. And then 90 days in you’re like, okay, I was way down there. Okay, the mountain. Okay, I don’t look up. Just keep making progress, progress, progress and progress really does compound. And one day you wake up and like, wow, it’s amazing how far I’ve come.
And if you look at a chart of Pershing Square, our company, you can see the absolute bottom. You can see where we were, you can see the drop and you can see where we are now. And that huge drop that felt like a complete unbelievable disaster looks like a little bump on the curve. And it really gives you perspective on these things. You just have to power through. And I think the key is, I’ve always been fortunate from a mental health point of view and nutrition, sleep, exercise, and a little progress every day. That’s it. And good friends and family. I had go take a walk with a friend every night and a sister who loves me and parents who were supportive, but they were all worried about their son, their brother. It was a moment.
And also, by the way, the other thing to think about is when you recover from something like this, you really appreciate it. And also as much of the media loves when some successful person falls, they love writing the story of success, they love even more the story of failure. But when you recover from that, it’s kind of like the American story. America, you think of the great entrepreneurs and how many failures they had before they succeeded. How many rocket launches did SpaceX have explode on the pad? And then you look at success. I mean, that’s why Musk is so admired.
Herbalife and Carl Icahn
Lex Fridman
You mentioned Herbalife. Can you take me through the saga of that? It’s historic.
You mentioned Herbalife. Can you take me through the saga of that? It’s historic.
Bill Ackman
So we at Pershing Square short a very few stocks. And the reason for that is short selling is just inherently treacherous. So if you buy a stock, it’s called going long. You’re buying something, your worst case scenario is you lose your whole investment. You buy a stock for 100, it goes to zero, you lose $100 per share. You buy one share, you lose 100. You short a stock at 100. What it means is you borrow the security from someone else. The analogy I gave that made it easy for people to understand, it’s a bit like you think silver coins are going to go down in value, and you have a friend who’s got a whole pile of these 1880 silver US dollars, and you think they’re going to go down in value, and say, “Hey, can I borrow 10 of those dollars from you?”
So we at Pershing Square short a very few stocks. And the reason for that is short selling is just inherently treacherous. So if you buy a stock, it’s called going long. You’re buying something, your worst case scenario is you lose your whole investment. You buy a stock for 100, it goes to zero, you lose $100 per share. You buy one share, you lose 100. You short a stock at 100. What it means is you borrow the security from someone else. The analogy I gave that made it easy for people to understand, it’s a bit like you think silver coins are going to go down in value, and you have a friend who’s got a whole pile of these 1880 silver US dollars, and you think they’re going to go down in value, and say, “Hey, can I borrow 10 of those dollars from you?”
He’s like, “Sure, but what are you going to pay me to borrow them?” I’m like, “I’ll pay you interest on the value of the dollars today.” So you borrow the dollars that are worth $100 each today, you pay them interest while you’re borrowing them, and then you go sell them in the market for $100. That’s what they’re worth. And then they go down in price to 50. You go back in, you buy the silver dollars back at $50 and you give them back to your friend. Your friend is fine. You borrowed 10, you gave him the 10 back and he got interest. In the meantime, he’s happy. He made money on his coin collection. You, however, made $50 times the 10 coins, you made 500 bucks. That’s pretty good. The problem with that is what if you sell them and they go from 100 to 1000, now you’re going to have to go buy them back and you got to pay whatever, $10,000 to buy back coins that you sold for 500.
You’re going to lose $9,500. And there’s no limit to how high a stock price can go. Companies go to $3 trillion in value. Tesla, a lot of people shorted Tesla saying, oh, it’s overvalued. He’s never going to be able to make a successful electric car. Well, I’m sure the people went bankrupt shorting Tesla. That’s why we didn’t short stocks. But I was presented with this actually a reporter that covered the other short investment we made early in the career, a company called MBIA, came to me and said, “Bill, I found this incredible company. You got to take a look at it. It’s a total fraud and they’re scamming poor people.”
Lex Fridman
And we should say that MBIA was a very successful short.
And we should say that MBIA was a very successful short.
Bill Ackman
It was a big part of it was that we used a different kind of instrument to short it where we reversed that sort of… we made the investment asymmetric in our favor, meaning put up a small amount of money, if it works, we make a fortune. Whereas, short selling is you kind of sell something and you have to buy it back at a higher price. Herbalife didn’t have the, what’s called credit default swaps that you purchase. Not a big enough company. It didn’t have enough debt outstanding to be able to implement it. You had to short the stock in order to make it as successful, to bet against the company. And the more work I did in the company, the more I was like, oh, my God, this thing’s an incredible scam. They purport to sell weight loss shakes, but in reality, they’re selling kind a fake business plan.
It was a big part of it was that we used a different kind of instrument to short it where we reversed that sort of… we made the investment asymmetric in our favor, meaning put up a small amount of money, if it works, we make a fortune. Whereas, short selling is you kind of sell something and you have to buy it back at a higher price. Herbalife didn’t have the, what’s called credit default swaps that you purchase. Not a big enough company. It didn’t have enough debt outstanding to be able to implement it. You had to short the stock in order to make it as successful, to bet against the company. And the more work I did in the company, the more I was like, oh, my God, this thing’s an incredible scam. They purport to sell weight loss shakes, but in reality, they’re selling kind a fake business plan.
And the people that adopt it lose money and they go after poor people. They go after, actually in many cases, undocumented immigrants who are pitched on the American Dream opportunity. And because they have few other options because they can’t get legal employment, they become Herbalife distributors. And it’s a business where you, so-called multi-level marketing. Multi-level marketing is sort of the name for a legitimate company like this. Or it’s a pyramid scheme where basically your sales are really only coming from people you convince to buy the product by getting them into the business. That’s precisely what this company is. And like, okay, shorting a pyramid scheme seems like, one, we’ll make a bunch of money, but two, the world will be behind us because they’re harming poor people. Regulators will get interested in a company like this. And we said, the FTC is going to shut this thing down.
And we did a ton of work and I gave this sort of epic presentation laying out all the facts, stock got completely crushed, and we were on our way. And the government actually got interested early on, launched an investigation pretty early, SEC and otherwise. But then a guy named Carl Icahn showed up, and we have a little bit of a backstory, but his motivations here were not really principally driven by thinking Herbalife was a good company. He thought it was a good way to hurt me. So he basically bought a bunch of stock and said it was a really great company, and Carl, at least at the time, threw his weight around a bit. He was a credible investor, had a lot of resources, and that began the saga.
Lex Fridman
So he was, we should say, a legendary investor himself.
So he was, we should say, a legendary investor himself.
Bill Ackman
I’d say legendary in a sense. Yes, for sure. An iconic…
I’d say legendary in a sense. Yes, for sure. An iconic…
Lex Fridman
Iconic.
Iconic.
Bill Ackman
… Carl Icahn.
… Carl Icahn.
Lex Fridman
Oh, that’s very well done.
Oh, that’s very well done.
Bill Ackman
Yeah, so definitely a iconic investor.
Yeah, so definitely a iconic investor.
Lex Fridman
So what was the backstory between the two of you?
So what was the backstory between the two of you?
Bill Ackman
So I mentioned that I had another period of time where significant business challenges… This was my first fund called Gotham Partners. And we had a court stop a transaction between a private company we owned and a public company. It’s another long story if you want to go there.
So I mentioned that I had another period of time where significant business challenges… This was my first fund called Gotham Partners. And we had a court stop a transaction between a private company we owned and a public company. It’s another long story if you want to go there.
Lex Fridman
I would love to hear it as well.
I would love to hear it as well.
Bill Ackman
But it was really my deciding to wind up my former fund. And we owned a big stake in a company called Hallwood Realty Partners, which was a company that owned real estate assets and it was worth a lot more than where it was trading, but it needed an activist to really unlock the value. And we were in fact of going out of business and didn’t have the time or the resources to pursue it. So I sold it to Carl Icahn, and I sold it to him at a premium to where the stock was trading. I think the stock was like 66. I sold it to him for 80, but it was worth about 150. And I said, look… And part of the deal was Carl’s like, look, I’ll give you schmuck insurance. I’ll make you sure you don’t look bad. And I had another deal at a higher price without schmuck insurance, but a deal with Carl at a lower price with schmuck insurance.
But it was really my deciding to wind up my former fund. And we owned a big stake in a company called Hallwood Realty Partners, which was a company that owned real estate assets and it was worth a lot more than where it was trading, but it needed an activist to really unlock the value. And we were in fact of going out of business and didn’t have the time or the resources to pursue it. So I sold it to Carl Icahn, and I sold it to him at a premium to where the stock was trading. I think the stock was like 66. I sold it to him for 80, but it was worth about 150. And I said, look… And part of the deal was Carl’s like, look, I’ll give you schmuck insurance. I’ll make you sure you don’t look bad. And I had another deal at a higher price without schmuck insurance, but a deal with Carl at a lower price with schmuck insurance.
And the way the schmuck insurance went, he said, “Look, Bill, if I sell the stock in the next three years for a higher price, I’ll give you 50% of my profit.” That’s a pretty good deal. So we made that deal, and because I was dealing with Carl Icahn who had a reputation for being difficult, I was very focused on the agreement and we didn’t want him to be able to be cute. So the agreement said, if he sells or otherwise transfers his shares. And we came up with a definition to include every version of sell, okay, because it’s Carl. Well, he then buys the stake and then makes a bid for the company and plan is for him to get the company. And he bids like 120 a share, and the company hires Morgan Stanley to sell itself, and he raises bid to 125 and then 130, and eventually gets sold, I don’t remember the exact price, let’s say $145 a share.
And Carl’s not the winning bidder, and he sells his stock or he loses or transfers his shares for $145 a share. So he owes actually our investors the difference between 145 and 80 times 50%. And I had… Lawyers never like you to put a arithmetic example. I put a formula out of a math book in the documents so there can be no confusion. It was only an eight page, really simple agreement. So the deal closes and he’s supposed to pay us in two business days or three business days. I wait a few business days, no money comes in. I call Carl. I’m like, “Carl, congratulations on the Hallwood Realty.” “Thanks Bill.” I said, “Carl, just I want to remind you, I know it’s been a few years, but we have this agreement. Remember the schmuck insurance?” He’s like, “Yeah.” And I said, “Well, you owe us our schmuck insurance.”
He said, “What do you mean? I didn’t sell my shares.” And I said, “Do you still have the shares?” He says, “No.” I said, “What happened to them?” “Well, the company did a merger for cash and they took away my shares, but I didn’t sell them. Do you understand what happened?” And I said, “Carl, I’m going to have to sue you.” He said, “Sue me. I’m going to sue you,” he says.
So I sued him and the legal system in America can take some time. And what he would do is we sued and then we won in the whatever New York Supreme Court, and then he appealed, and you can appeal six months after the case. He waited till the 179th day, and then he would appeal. And then we fought at the next level, and then he would appeal. And he appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. Of course, the Supreme Court wouldn’t take the case. It took years. Now, as part of our agreement, we got 9% interest on the money that he owed us. So I viewed it as my Carl Icahn money market account with a much higher interest rate. And eventually I won.
Lex Fridman
What was the amount? Just-
What was the amount? Just-
Bill Ackman
Tiny. Now it was material to my investors. So my first fund, I wound it down, but I wanted to maximize everything for my investors. These are the people who backed me at 26 years old. I was right out of business school and no experience, and they supported me. So I’m going to go to the end of the earth for them. And four and a half million relative to our fund at the end was maybe 400 million. So it wasn’t a huge number, but it was a big percentage of what was left after I sold our liquid securities. So I was fighting for it. So we got four and a half million plus interest for eight years or something. That’s how long the litigation took. So we got about double. So he owed me $9 million, which to Carl Icahn, who had probably a $20 billion net worth. At the time, this was nothing. But to me, it was like, okay, this is my investor’s money. I’m going to get it back. And so eventually we won. Eventually he paid, and then he called me and he said, “Bill, congratulations. Now we can be friends and we can do some investing together.” I’m like, “Carl, fuck you.”
Tiny. Now it was material to my investors. So my first fund, I wound it down, but I wanted to maximize everything for my investors. These are the people who backed me at 26 years old. I was right out of business school and no experience, and they supported me. So I’m going to go to the end of the earth for them. And four and a half million relative to our fund at the end was maybe 400 million. So it wasn’t a huge number, but it was a big percentage of what was left after I sold our liquid securities. So I was fighting for it. So we got four and a half million plus interest for eight years or something. That’s how long the litigation took. So we got about double. So he owed me $9 million, which to Carl Icahn, who had probably a $20 billion net worth. At the time, this was nothing. But to me, it was like, okay, this is my investor’s money. I’m going to get it back. And so eventually we won. Eventually he paid, and then he called me and he said, “Bill, congratulations. Now we can be friends and we can do some investing together.” I’m like, “Carl, fuck you.”
Lex Fridman
You actually said fuck you?
You actually said fuck you?
Bill Ackman
Yes. And I’m not that kind of person generally, but he made eight years to pay me, not me, even me, my investors money they owed. So yeah. So he probably didn’t like that. So he kind of hung around in the weeds waiting for an opportunity. And then from there I started purging. We had a kind straight line up. We were up. The first 12 years, we could do nothing wrong. Then Valeant, Herbalife, he sees an opportunity and he buys the stock. He figures he’s going to run me off the road. And so that was the beginning of that. And the moment, and I think it’s, I’m told by CNBC, it’s the most watched segment in business television history. They’re interviewing me about the Herbalife investment on CNBC, and then Carl Icahn calls into the show and we have kind of a interesting conversation where he calls me all kinds of names and stuff. So it was a moment. It was a moment in my life.
Yes. And I’m not that kind of person generally, but he made eight years to pay me, not me, even me, my investors money they owed. So yeah. So he probably didn’t like that. So he kind of hung around in the weeds waiting for an opportunity. And then from there I started purging. We had a kind straight line up. We were up. The first 12 years, we could do nothing wrong. Then Valeant, Herbalife, he sees an opportunity and he buys the stock. He figures he’s going to run me off the road. And so that was the beginning of that. And the moment, and I think it’s, I’m told by CNBC, it’s the most watched segment in business television history. They’re interviewing me about the Herbalife investment on CNBC, and then Carl Icahn calls into the show and we have kind of a interesting conversation where he calls me all kinds of names and stuff. So it was a moment. It was a moment in my life.
Lex Fridman
It wasn’t public information that he was long on Herbalife?
It wasn’t public information that he was long on Herbalife?
Bill Ackman
He didn’t yet disclose he had a stake. But he was just telling me how stupid I was to be short at this company.
He didn’t yet disclose he had a stake. But he was just telling me how stupid I was to be short at this company.
Lex Fridman
So for him, it wasn’t about the fundamentals of the company, it was just personal?
So for him, it wasn’t about the fundamentals of the company, it was just personal?
Bill Ackman
100%.
100%.
Lex Fridman
Is there part of you that regrets saying fuck you on that phone call to Carl Icahn?
Is there part of you that regrets saying fuck you on that phone call to Carl Icahn?
Bill Ackman
No. I generally have no regrets because I’m very happy with where I am now. And I feel like it’s a bit like you step on the butterfly in the forest and the world changes because every action has a reaction. If you’re happy with who you are, where you are in life, every decision you’ve made, good or bad over the course of your life, got you to precisely where you are. I wouldn’t change anything.
No. I generally have no regrets because I’m very happy with where I am now. And I feel like it’s a bit like you step on the butterfly in the forest and the world changes because every action has a reaction. If you’re happy with who you are, where you are in life, every decision you’ve made, good or bad over the course of your life, got you to precisely where you are. I wouldn’t change anything.
Lex Fridman
He said, you lost money on Herbalife. So he did the long-term battle.
He said, you lost money on Herbalife. So he did the long-term battle.
Bill Ackman
What he did is he got on the board of the company and used the company’s financial resources plus his stake in the business to squeeze us. And a squeeze in short selling is where you restrict the supply of the securities so that there’s a scarcity, and then you encourage people to buy the stock and you drive the stock up. And as I explained before, you short those coins at 10, they go to 100, you can lose, theoretically, an unlimited amount of money. And that’s scary. That’s why we don’t short stocks. That’s why I didn’t short stocks before this, but this was… Unfortunately, I had to have the personal lesson.
What he did is he got on the board of the company and used the company’s financial resources plus his stake in the business to squeeze us. And a squeeze in short selling is where you restrict the supply of the securities so that there’s a scarcity, and then you encourage people to buy the stock and you drive the stock up. And as I explained before, you short those coins at 10, they go to 100, you can lose, theoretically, an unlimited amount of money. And that’s scary. That’s why we don’t short stocks. That’s why I didn’t short stocks before this, but this was… Unfortunately, I had to have the personal lesson.
Lex Fridman
So how much was for him personal versus part of the game of investing?
So how much was for him personal versus part of the game of investing?
Bill Ackman
Well, he thought he could make money doing this. He wouldn’t have done it if he did otherwise. He thought his bully pulpit, his ability to create a short squeeze, his control over the company would enable him to achieve this. And he made a billion, we lost a billion.
Well, he thought he could make money doing this. He wouldn’t have done it if he did otherwise. He thought his bully pulpit, his ability to create a short squeeze, his control over the company would enable him to achieve this. And he made a billion, we lost a billion.
Lex Fridman
So you think it was a financial decision not a personal?
So you think it was a financial decision not a personal?
Bill Ackman
It was a personal decision to pursue it, but he was waiting for an opportunity where he could make money at our expense, and it was kind of a brilliant opportunity for him. Now, the irony is… Well, first of all, the FTC found a few interesting facts. So one, the government launched an investigation. They ended up settling with the company, and the company paid $220 million in fines.
It was a personal decision to pursue it, but he was waiting for an opportunity where he could make money at our expense, and it was kind of a brilliant opportunity for him. Now, the irony is… Well, first of all, the FTC found a few interesting facts. So one, the government launched an investigation. They ended up settling with the company, and the company paid $220 million in fines.
I met a professor from Berkeley a couple of years ago who told me that he had been hired by the government as their expert on Herbalife, and he got access to all their data, was able to prove that they’re a pyramid scheme. But the government ultimately settled with Carl because they were afraid they could possibly lose in court. So they settled with him. But if you look at the stock, if we’d been able to stay short the entire time, we would’ve made a bunch of money because the stock had a $6 billion market cap, and we shorted it. Today as probably a billion, a billion and a half.
Lex Fridman
So you left the short or whatever that’s called…?
So you left the short or whatever that’s called…?
Bill Ackman
We covered, we closed it out. When we sold Valeant, we covered Herbalife. That was the resetting moment for the firm because it would just, psychologically… And the beauty of investing is you don’t need to make it back the way you lost it. You can just take your loss. By the way, losses are valuable and that the government allows you to take a tax loss and that can shelter other gains. And we just refocused.
We covered, we closed it out. When we sold Valeant, we covered Herbalife. That was the resetting moment for the firm because it would just, psychologically… And the beauty of investing is you don’t need to make it back the way you lost it. You can just take your loss. By the way, losses are valuable and that the government allows you to take a tax loss and that can shelter other gains. And we just refocused.
Lex Fridman
Can you say one thing you really like about Carl Icahn and one thing you really don’t like about him?
Can you say one thing you really like about Carl Icahn and one thing you really don’t like about him?
Bill Ackman
Sure. So he’s a very charming guy. So in the midst of all this, at the Hallwood one, he took me out for dinner to his favorite Italian restaurant.
Sure. So he’s a very charming guy. So in the midst of all this, at the Hallwood one, he took me out for dinner to his favorite Italian restaurant.
Lex Fridman
Really?
Really?
Bill Ackman
Yeah. We’re in the middle of the litigation to see if he could resolve it, and he offered 10 million to my favorite charity. The problem was that it wasn’t my money, it was my investor’s money. So I couldn’t settle with him on that basis, but I had the chance to spend real time with him at dinner. He’s funny, he’s charismatic, he’s got incredible stories. And actually I made peace with him over time. We had a little hug out on CNBC, even had him to my house, believe it or not. I hosted something called the Finance Cup, which is a tennis tournament between people in finance in Europe and the US. And we had the event at my house and one guy thought to invite Carl Icahn. And so we had Carl Icahn there to present awards. And again, I have to say, I kind of like the guy, but I didn’t like him much during this.
Yeah. We’re in the middle of the litigation to see if he could resolve it, and he offered 10 million to my favorite charity. The problem was that it wasn’t my money, it was my investor’s money. So I couldn’t settle with him on that basis, but I had the chance to spend real time with him at dinner. He’s funny, he’s charismatic, he’s got incredible stories. And actually I made peace with him over time. We had a little hug out on CNBC, even had him to my house, believe it or not. I hosted something called the Finance Cup, which is a tennis tournament between people in finance in Europe and the US. And we had the event at my house and one guy thought to invite Carl Icahn. And so we had Carl Icahn there to present awards. And again, I have to say, I kind of like the guy, but I didn’t like him much during this.
Lex Fridman
Because at least from the outsider perspective, there’s a bit of a personal vengeance here or anger can build up. Do you ever worry the personal attacks between powerful investors can cloud your judgment of what is the right financial decision?
Because at least from the outsider perspective, there’s a bit of a personal vengeance here or anger can build up. Do you ever worry the personal attacks between powerful investors can cloud your judgment of what is the right financial decision?
Bill Ackman
I think it’s possible, but again, I try to be extremely economically rational. And actually the last seven years have been quite peaceful. I really have not been an activist in the old form for many years. And the vast majority of even our activist investments historically were very polite, respectful cases. The press, of course, focuses on the more interesting ones. Like Chipotle was one of the best investments we ever made. We got four of eight board seats and we worked with management and it was a great outcome. I don’t think there’s ever been a story about it. And the stock’s up almost 10 times from the time we hired Brian Nichols as CEO. But it’s not interesting because there was no battle. Whereas, Herbalife, of course, was like an epic battle, even Canadian Pacific. So for a period there, most people when they meet me in person, they’re like, “Wow, bill, you seem like a really nice guy. But I thought…” But things have been pretty calm for the last seven years.
I think it’s possible, but again, I try to be extremely economically rational. And actually the last seven years have been quite peaceful. I really have not been an activist in the old form for many years. And the vast majority of even our activist investments historically were very polite, respectful cases. The press, of course, focuses on the more interesting ones. Like Chipotle was one of the best investments we ever made. We got four of eight board seats and we worked with management and it was a great outcome. I don’t think there’s ever been a story about it. And the stock’s up almost 10 times from the time we hired Brian Nichols as CEO. But it’s not interesting because there was no battle. Whereas, Herbalife, of course, was like an epic battle, even Canadian Pacific. So for a period there, most people when they meet me in person, they’re like, “Wow, bill, you seem like a really nice guy. But I thought…” But things have been pretty calm for the last seven years.
Oct 7
Lex Fridman
Of course, there’s more than just the investing that your life is about, especially recently. Let me just ask you about what’s going on in the world. First, what was your reaction and what is your reaction and thoughts with respect to the October 7th attacks by Hamas on Israel?
Of course, there’s more than just the investing that your life is about, especially recently. Let me just ask you about what’s going on in the world. First, what was your reaction and what is your reaction and thoughts with respect to the October 7th attacks by Hamas on Israel?
Bill Ackman
It’s a sad world that we live in. That, one, we have terrorists, and two, that we could have such barbaric terrorism. And just a reminder of that.
It’s a sad world that we live in. That, one, we have terrorists, and two, that we could have such barbaric terrorism. And just a reminder of that.
Lex Fridman
So there’s several things I can ask here. First, on your views on the prospects of the Middle East, but also on the reaction to this war in the United States, especially on university campuses. So first, let me just ask, you’ve said that you’re pro-Palestinian. Can you explain what you mean by that?
So there’s several things I can ask here. First, on your views on the prospects of the Middle East, but also on the reaction to this war in the United States, especially on university campuses. So first, let me just ask, you’ve said that you’re pro-Palestinian. Can you explain what you mean by that?
Bill Ackman
With all of my posts about Israel, I’m obviously very supportive of the country of Israel, Israel’s right to exist, Israel’s right to defend itself. My Arab friends, my Palestinian friends were kind of saying, “Hey Bill, where are you? What about Palestinian lives?” And I was pretty early in my life, a guy named Marty Peretz, who’s been important to me over the course of my life, a professor or first investor in my fund, introduced me to Neri, asked me when I was right out of school to join this nonprofit called the Jerusalem Foundation, which was a charitable foundation that supported Teddy Kollek when he was mayor of Jerusalem. I ended up becoming the youngest chairman of the Jerusalem Foundation in my 30s. And I spent some time in Israel, and the early philanthropic stuff I did with the Jerusalem Foundation, the thing I was most interested in was kind of the plight to the Palestinians and kind of peaceful coexistence.
With all of my posts about Israel, I’m obviously very supportive of the country of Israel, Israel’s right to exist, Israel’s right to defend itself. My Arab friends, my Palestinian friends were kind of saying, “Hey Bill, where are you? What about Palestinian lives?” And I was pretty early in my life, a guy named Marty Peretz, who’s been important to me over the course of my life, a professor or first investor in my fund, introduced me to Neri, asked me when I was right out of school to join this nonprofit called the Jerusalem Foundation, which was a charitable foundation that supported Teddy Kollek when he was mayor of Jerusalem. I ended up becoming the youngest chairman of the Jerusalem Foundation in my 30s. And I spent some time in Israel, and the early philanthropic stuff I did with the Jerusalem Foundation, the thing I was most interested in was kind of the plight to the Palestinians and kind of peaceful coexistence.
And so I had kind of an early kind of perspective, and as chairman of the Jerusalem Foundation, I would go into Arab communities and I would meet with families in their homes. You get a sense of the humanity of a people. And I care about humanity. I generally take the side of people who’ve been disadvantaged. Almost all of our philanthropic work has been in that capacity. So it’s sort of my natural perspective, but I don’t take the side of terrorists ever, obviously. And the whole thing is just a tragedy.
Lex Fridman
So to you, this is about Hamas, not about Palestine?
So to you, this is about Hamas, not about Palestine?
Bill Ackman
Yes. I mean, the problem of course is when Hamas controls… for the last almost 20 years, has controlled Gaza, including the education system. They’re educating. You see these training videos of kindergartners, indoctrinating them into hating Jews and Israel. And of course, you don’t like to see Palestinians celebrating some of those early videos of October 7th with dead bodies in the back of trucks and people cheering. So it’s a really unfortunate situation, but I think about a Palestinian life as important, as valuable as a Jewish life, as a American life. And what do people really want? They want a place. They want a home. They want to be able to feed their family. They want a job that generates the resources to feed their family. They want their kids to have a better life than they’ve had. They want peace. I think these are basic human things. I’m sure the vast majority of Palestinians share these views, but it’s such an embedded situation with hatred and, as I say, indoctrination.
Yes. I mean, the problem of course is when Hamas controls… for the last almost 20 years, has controlled Gaza, including the education system. They’re educating. You see these training videos of kindergartners, indoctrinating them into hating Jews and Israel. And of course, you don’t like to see Palestinians celebrating some of those early videos of October 7th with dead bodies in the back of trucks and people cheering. So it’s a really unfortunate situation, but I think about a Palestinian life as important, as valuable as a Jewish life, as a American life. And what do people really want? They want a place. They want a home. They want to be able to feed their family. They want a job that generates the resources to feed their family. They want their kids to have a better life than they’ve had. They want peace. I think these are basic human things. I’m sure the vast majority of Palestinians share these views, but it’s such an embedded situation with hatred and, as I say, indoctrination.
And then going back to incentives, terrorists generate their resources by committing terrorism, and that’s how they get funding. And there’s a lot of graft. It’s a plutocracy. The top of the terrorist pyramid, if you accept the numbers that are in the press, the top leaders have billions of dollars. 40 billion or so has gone into Gaza over the last… and the West Bank over the last 30 years, a number like that. And a lot of it’s disappeared into some combination of corruption or tunnels or weapons. And the tragedy is you look at what Singapore has achieved in the last 30 years, right?
Lex Fridman
Do you think that’s still possible if we look into the future of 10, 20, 50 years from now?
Do you think that’s still possible if we look into the future of 10, 20, 50 years from now?
Bill Ackman
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Lex Fridman
So not just peace, but-
So not just peace, but-
Bill Ackman
Peace comes with prosperity. People are under the leadership of terrorists, you’re not going to have prosperity and you’re not going to have peace. And I think the Israelis withdrew in 2005 and fairly quickly, Hamas took control of the situation. That should never have been allowed to happen. And I think if you think about… I had the opportunity to spend, call it, an hour with Henry Kissinger a few months before we passed away, and we were talking about Gaza, or in the early stage of the war. He said, “Look, you can think about Gaza as a test of a two-state solution. It’s not looking good.” These were his words. So the next time round, the Palestinian people should have their own state, but it can’t be a state where 40 billion resources goes in and is spent on weaponry and missiles and rockets going into Israel. And I do think a consortium of the Gulf states, the Saudis and others have to ultimately oversee the governance of this region. I think if that can happen, I think you can have peace, you can have prosperity. And I’m fundamentally an optimist.
Peace comes with prosperity. People are under the leadership of terrorists, you’re not going to have prosperity and you’re not going to have peace. And I think the Israelis withdrew in 2005 and fairly quickly, Hamas took control of the situation. That should never have been allowed to happen. And I think if you think about… I had the opportunity to spend, call it, an hour with Henry Kissinger a few months before we passed away, and we were talking about Gaza, or in the early stage of the war. He said, “Look, you can think about Gaza as a test of a two-state solution. It’s not looking good.” These were his words. So the next time round, the Palestinian people should have their own state, but it can’t be a state where 40 billion resources goes in and is spent on weaponry and missiles and rockets going into Israel. And I do think a consortium of the Gulf states, the Saudis and others have to ultimately oversee the governance of this region. I think if that can happen, I think you can have peace, you can have prosperity. And I’m fundamentally an optimist.
Lex Fridman
So a coalition of governance.
So a coalition of governance.
Bill Ackman
Governance matters, going back to what we talked about before.
Governance matters, going back to what we talked about before.
Lex Fridman
And that kind of approach can give the people a chance to flourish.
And that kind of approach can give the people a chance to flourish.
Bill Ackman
100%. 100%. I mean, look at what Dubai has accomplished with nomads in the desert. It’s a tourist destination. Gaza could have been a tourist destination.
100%. 100%. I mean, look at what Dubai has accomplished with nomads in the desert. It’s a tourist destination. Gaza could have been a tourist destination.
College campus protests
Lex Fridman
Take me through the saga of university presidents testifying on this topic, on the topic of protests on college campuses, protests that call for the genocide of Jewish people and the university presidents… Maybe you could describe it more precisely, but they fail to denounce the calls for genocide.
Take me through the saga of university presidents testifying on this topic, on the topic of protests on college campuses, protests that call for the genocide of Jewish people and the university presidents… Maybe you could describe it more precisely, but they fail to denounce the calls for genocide.
Bill Ackman
So it begins on October 8th probably. And you can do a compare and contrast with how Dartmouth managed the events of October 7th and the aftermath, and how Harvard did. And on October 8th or shortly thereafter, the Dartmouth president, who had been in her job for precisely the same number of months that the Harvard president had been in her job. The first thing she did is she got the most important professors of Middle East studies who were Arab and who were Jews and convened them and held an open session Q&A for students to talk about what’s going on in the Middle East, and began an opportunity for common understanding among the student body. And Dartmouth has been a relatively benign environment on this issue, and students are able to do work and there aren’t disruptive protests with people with bullhorn…
So it begins on October 8th probably. And you can do a compare and contrast with how Dartmouth managed the events of October 7th and the aftermath, and how Harvard did. And on October 8th or shortly thereafter, the Dartmouth president, who had been in her job for precisely the same number of months that the Harvard president had been in her job. The first thing she did is she got the most important professors of Middle East studies who were Arab and who were Jews and convened them and held an open session Q&A for students to talk about what’s going on in the Middle East, and began an opportunity for common understanding among the student body. And Dartmouth has been a relatively benign environment on this issue, and students are able to do work and there aren’t disruptive protests with people with bullhorn…
Bill Ackman
Work and there aren’t disruptive protests with people with bullhorns walking into classrooms interfering with … People pay, today, $82,000 a year, which itself is crazy, to go to Harvard. But imagine your family borrows the money or you borrow the money as a student and you’re learning is disrupted by constant protests and the university does nothing. When George Floyd died, the Harvard president wrote a very strong letter denouncing what had taken place and calling this an important moment in American history and took it incredibly seriously. Her first letter about October 7th was not that, let’s put it that way. Then her second letter was not that. Then, ultimately, she was sort of forced by the board or pressured to make a more public statement, but it was clear that it was hard for her to come to an understanding of this terrorist act.
Work and there aren’t disruptive protests with people with bullhorns walking into classrooms interfering with … People pay, today, $82,000 a year, which itself is crazy, to go to Harvard. But imagine your family borrows the money or you borrow the money as a student and you’re learning is disrupted by constant protests and the university does nothing. When George Floyd died, the Harvard president wrote a very strong letter denouncing what had taken place and calling this an important moment in American history and took it incredibly seriously. Her first letter about October 7th was not that, let’s put it that way. Then her second letter was not that. Then, ultimately, she was sort of forced by the board or pressured to make a more public statement, but it was clear that it was hard for her to come to an understanding of this terrorist act.
Then the protests erupted on campus and they started out reasonably benign. Then the protesters got more and more aggressive in terms of violating university rules on things like bullying, and the university did nothing. That obviously for the Jewish students, the Israeli students, the Israeli faculty, Jewish faculty, created an incredibly uncomfortable environment. The president seemed indifferent. I went up to campus and I met with hundreds of students in small groups, in larger groups and they’re like, “Bill, why is the president doing nothing? Why is the administration doing nothing?” That was really the beginning.
I reached out to the president, reached out to the board of Harvard, I said, “Look, this thing is headed in the wrong direction and you need to fix it. I have some ideas, love to share.” I got the Heisman, as they say. They just kept pushing off the opportunity for me to meet with the president and meet with the board. At a certain point in time I pushed, I’m kind of a activist when he pushed me, it reminded me of early days of activism where I couldn’t get the CEO of Wendy’s to return my call. I couldn’t get the CEO of Harvard to take a meeting.
Then finally I spoke to the chairman of the board, a woman by the name of Penny Pritzker, who I’m on a business school board with her. It was, as I described, one of the more disappointing conversations in my life. She seemed a bit like, if you will, deer in the headlights. They couldn’t do this, they couldn’t do that. The law was preventing them from doing various things. That led to my first letter to the university. I sort of ended the letter of giving this president of Harvard a dare to be great speech. This is your opportunity. You can fix this. This could be your legacy. I emailed it to the president and the board members whose email addresses I had, I posted it on Twitter and I got no response, no acknowledgement, nothing. In fact, the open dialogue I had with a couple of people on the board basically got shut down after that.
That led to letter number two. Then when the Congress, led by Elise Stefanik, announced an investigation of antisemitism on campus and concern about violations of law, the president was called to testify along with two other … The president of MIT, the president of University of Pennsylvania were having similar issues on campus. I reached out to the president of Harvard and said, well, one, the Israeli government had gotten in touch and offered the opportunity for me to see the Hamas, if you will, GoPro film. I said, “You know, I’d love to show it at Harvard,” and they thought that would be a great idea. I partnered with the head of Harvard Chabad, a guy named Rabbi Hirschy, and we were putting the film up on campus.
I thought if the president were to see this, it would give her a lot of perspective on what happened and she should see it before her testimony. I reached out to her, or actually Rabbi Hirschy did. He was told she would be out of town and couldn’t see it. Then I reached out to her again and said, “Look, I’ll facilitate your attendance in the Congress. Come see the film, I’ll fly you down.” That was rejected, and then she testified.
I watched a good percentage, 80% of the testimony, of all three presidents, and it was an embarrassment to the country, embarrassment to the universities. They were evasive. They didn’t answer questions. They were rude. They smirked. They looked very disrespectful to our Congress. Then, of course, there was that several minutes where finally Elise Stefanik was not getting answers to her questions, and she said, “Let me be kind of clear. What if protestors were calling for genocide for the Jews? Does that violate your rules on bullying and harassment?” The three of them basically gave the same answer; “It depends on the context.” Not until they actually executed on the genocide that the university had the right to intervene.
The thing that perhaps bothered me the most was the incredible hypocrisy. Each of these universities are ranked by this entity called FIRE, which is a nonprofit that focuses on free speech on campus. Harvard, it’s been in the bottom quartile for the last five years and dropped to last before October 7th, out of 250.
Lex Fridman
I should mention briefly that I’ve interviewed on this podcast, the founder of FIRE and the current head of FIRE, where we discussed this at length, including running for the board of Harvard and the whole procedure of all that. It’s quite a fascinating investigation of free speech. For people who care about free speech absolutism that’s a good episode to listen to because those folks kind of fight for this idea. It’s a difficult idea actually to internalize; what does free speech on college campuses look like?
I should mention briefly that I’ve interviewed on this podcast, the founder of FIRE and the current head of FIRE, where we discussed this at length, including running for the board of Harvard and the whole procedure of all that. It’s quite a fascinating investigation of free speech. For people who care about free speech absolutism that’s a good episode to listen to because those folks kind of fight for this idea. It’s a difficult idea actually to internalize; what does free speech on college campuses look like?
Bill Ackman
Harvard has become a place where free speech is not tolerated on campus, or at least free speech that’s not part of the accepted dialogue. This whole notion of speech codes and microaggressions really emerged on the Harvard, Yale campuses of the world. The then president of Harvard’s explanation for why you could call for the genocide of the Jewish people on campus was Harvard’s commitment to free expression. One of the more hypocritical statements of all time. You really can’t have it both ways. Either Harvard has to be a place where it’s a free speech … She basically said, “We’re a free speech absolutist place, which is why we have to allow this.” Harvard could not be further from that. That was a big part of it.
Harvard has become a place where free speech is not tolerated on campus, or at least free speech that’s not part of the accepted dialogue. This whole notion of speech codes and microaggressions really emerged on the Harvard, Yale campuses of the world. The then president of Harvard’s explanation for why you could call for the genocide of the Jewish people on campus was Harvard’s commitment to free expression. One of the more hypocritical statements of all time. You really can’t have it both ways. Either Harvard has to be a place where it’s a free speech … She basically said, “We’re a free speech absolutist place, which is why we have to allow this.” Harvard could not be further from that. That was a big part of it.
I was in the barber chair, if you will, getting a haircut. I had a guy on my team send me the three-minute section. I said, “Cut that line of questioning.” I put out a little tweet on that. I call it my greatest hits of posts, it’s got something like 110 million views. Everyone looked at this and said, “What is wrong with university campuses and their leadership,” and their governance, by the way. In a way, this whole conversation has been about governance. Harvard has a disastrous governance structure, which is why we have the problem we have.
Lex Fridman
Just to linger on the testimony, you mentioned smirks and this kind of stuff, and you mentioned dare to be great, I myself am kind of a sucker for great leadership. You mentioned Churchill or so on, even great speeches … People talk down on speeches like it’s maybe just words, but I think speeches can define a culture and define a place, define a people that can inspire. I think, actually, the testimony before Congress could have been an opportunity to redefine what Harvard is. Dare to be a great leader.
Just to linger on the testimony, you mentioned smirks and this kind of stuff, and you mentioned dare to be great, I myself am kind of a sucker for great leadership. You mentioned Churchill or so on, even great speeches … People talk down on speeches like it’s maybe just words, but I think speeches can define a culture and define a place, define a people that can inspire. I think, actually, the testimony before Congress could have been an opportunity to redefine what Harvard is. Dare to be a great leader.
Bill Ackman
The president of Harvard had a huge opportunity, because she went third. The first two gave the world’s most disastrous answers to the question, and she literally just copied their answer, which is, itself, kind of ironic in light of ultimately what happened.
The president of Harvard had a huge opportunity, because she went third. The first two gave the world’s most disastrous answers to the question, and she literally just copied their answer, which is, itself, kind of ironic in light of ultimately what happened.
Lex Fridman
It’s tough because you can get busy as a president, as a leader and so on. There’s these meetings, and so you think Congress, maybe you’re smirking at the ridiculousness of the meeting. You need to remember that many of these are opportunities to give a speech of a lifetime. If there is principles which you want to see an institution become and embody in the next several decades, there’s opportunities to do that. You, as a great leader, also need to have a sense of when is the opportunity to do that. October 7th really woke up the world on all sides, honestly. There is a serious issue going on here. Then the protests woke up the university to there’s a serious issue going on here. It’s an opportunity to speak on free speech and on genocide, both.
It’s tough because you can get busy as a president, as a leader and so on. There’s these meetings, and so you think Congress, maybe you’re smirking at the ridiculousness of the meeting. You need to remember that many of these are opportunities to give a speech of a lifetime. If there is principles which you want to see an institution become and embody in the next several decades, there’s opportunities to do that. You, as a great leader, also need to have a sense of when is the opportunity to do that. October 7th really woke up the world on all sides, honestly. There is a serious issue going on here. Then the protests woke up the university to there’s a serious issue going on here. It’s an opportunity to speak on free speech and on genocide, both.
Bill Ackman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
Do you see the criticism that you are a billionaire donor and you sort of used your power and financial influence unfairly to affect the governing structure of Harvard, in this case?
Do you see the criticism that you are a billionaire donor and you sort of used your power and financial influence unfairly to affect the governing structure of Harvard, in this case?
Bill Ackman
First of all, I never threatened to use financial or other resources. The only thing I did here was wrote. I wrote public letters, I spoke privately to a couple members of the board. I spoke for 45 minutes to the chairman. None of those conversations were effective or went anywhere, as far as I could tell. I think my public letters and then some of the posts, I did and that little three minute video excerpt had an impact, but it wasn’t about … I mean you can criticize me for being a billionaire, but it was really the words. It’s a bit like, again, going back to the corporate analogy, it’s not the fact that you own 5% of the company that causes people to vote in your favor, it’s the fact that your ideas are right.
First of all, I never threatened to use financial or other resources. The only thing I did here was wrote. I wrote public letters, I spoke privately to a couple members of the board. I spoke for 45 minutes to the chairman. None of those conversations were effective or went anywhere, as far as I could tell. I think my public letters and then some of the posts, I did and that little three minute video excerpt had an impact, but it wasn’t about … I mean you can criticize me for being a billionaire, but it was really the words. It’s a bit like, again, going back to the corporate analogy, it’s not the fact that you own 5% of the company that causes people to vote in your favor, it’s the fact that your ideas are right.
After the congressional testimony, the board of Harvard said that they were unanimously, a hundred percent behind President Gay. Clearly, I was ineffective. Ultimately what took her down was other, I would say, activists who identified issues with academic integrity and then she lost the confidence of the faculty. Once that happens, it’s hard to stay. I wanted her to be fired, basically, or be forced to resign because of failures of leadership, because that would’ve sent a message about the importance of leadership. Failure to stop a emergence of antisemitism on campus. There’s some news today; the protests are getting worse.
Lex Fridman
Is there some tension between free speech on college campuses and disciplining students for calls of genocide?
Is there some tension between free speech on college campuses and disciplining students for calls of genocide?
Bill Ackman
Yes, there’s certainly a tension. First of all, I think free speech is incredibly important. I’m a lot closer to absolutism on free speech than otherwise. The issue I had was the hypocrisy. They were restricting other kinds of speech on campus, principally conservative speech, conservative views. So it wasn’t a free speech, absolutist campus. The protests were actually quite threatening to students. There are limits to even absolutist free speech and they begin where people feel intimidation, harassment and threat to bodily harm, et cetera, that kind of speech is generally … Again, it’s pretty technical, but as people feel like they’re in imminent harm, by virtue of the protest, that speech is at risk of not meeting the standards for free speech.
Yes, there’s certainly a tension. First of all, I think free speech is incredibly important. I’m a lot closer to absolutism on free speech than otherwise. The issue I had was the hypocrisy. They were restricting other kinds of speech on campus, principally conservative speech, conservative views. So it wasn’t a free speech, absolutist campus. The protests were actually quite threatening to students. There are limits to even absolutist free speech and they begin where people feel intimidation, harassment and threat to bodily harm, et cetera, that kind of speech is generally … Again, it’s pretty technical, but as people feel like they’re in imminent harm, by virtue of the protest, that speech is at risk of not meeting the standards for free speech.
Harvard is a private corporation and as a private corporation, they can put on what restrictions they want. Harvard had introduced only a few months before bullying and harassment policies, and that’s why Representative Stefanik focused on … It’s not like she said, “Does calling for genocide against the Jews violate your free speech policies?” She said, “Does calling for genocide against the Jews violate your policies on bullying and harassment?”
I think everyone looked at this when they said, it depends on the context. They said, look, if you replaced Jews with some other ethnic group, students who’ve used the N word for example, have been thrown off campus or suspended. Students who’ve hate speeched directed at LGBTQ people has led to disciplinary action, but attacking, spitting on Jewish students or roughing them up a bit, seemed like we’re calling for their elimination, didn’t seem to violate the policies. Look, I think a university should be a place where you have broad views and open viewpoints and broad discussion, but it should also be a place where students don’t feel threatened going to class, where their learning is not interrupted, when final exams are not interrupted by people coming in with loud protests.
Students asked me when I went up there, “What would you do if you were Harvard president?” This was before I knew what was happening on the Dartmouth campus, I said, “I’d convene everyone together. This is Harvard. We have access to the best minds in the world. Let’s have a better understanding of the history. Let’s understand the backdrop. Let’s focus on solutions. Let’s bring Arab and Jewish and Israeli students together. Let’s form let groups to create communication.” That’s how you solve this kind of problem. None of that stuff has been done. It’s not that hard.
Lex Fridman
Do you think this reveals a deeper problem in terms of ideology and the governance of Harvard in maybe the culture of Harvard?
Do you think this reveals a deeper problem in terms of ideology and the governance of Harvard in maybe the culture of Harvard?
Bill Ackman
Yes. On governance, the governance structure is a disaster. The way it works today is Harvard has two principal boards. There’s the board of the corporation, the so-called fellows of Harvard. It’s a board of, I think, 12 independent directors and the president. There’s no shareholder vote, there’s no proxy system. It’s really a self-perpetuating board that effectively elects its own members. Once the balance tips, politically, one way or another, it can be kept that way forever. There’s no kind of rebalancing system. If a US corporation goes off the rails, so to speak, the shareholders can get together and vote off the directors. There’s no ability to vote off the directors.
Yes. On governance, the governance structure is a disaster. The way it works today is Harvard has two principal boards. There’s the board of the corporation, the so-called fellows of Harvard. It’s a board of, I think, 12 independent directors and the president. There’s no shareholder vote, there’s no proxy system. It’s really a self-perpetuating board that effectively elects its own members. Once the balance tips, politically, one way or another, it can be kept that way forever. There’s no kind of rebalancing system. If a US corporation goes off the rails, so to speak, the shareholders can get together and vote off the directors. There’s no ability to vote off the directors.
Then there’s the board of overseers, which is I think 32 directors. A few years ago, if you could put together 600 signatures, you could run for that board and put up a bunch of candidates and about five or six get elected each year. A group did exactly that, and it was an oil and gas kind of disinvestment group. They got the signatures, a couple of them got elected, and Harvard then changed the rules and they said, ” Now we need 3,200 signatures. By the way, if there are these dissident directors on the board, we’re going to cap them at five.” So if three were elected in the oil and gas thing, now they’re only two seats available.
Then a group of former students, kind of younger alums, one of whom I knew, approached me and said, “Look, Bill, we should run for the board.” They decided this pretty late, only a few weeks before the signatures were due. We’d love your support. I took a look at their platform, I thought it looked great. I said, “Look, happy to support.” I posted about them, did a Zoom with them, and they got thousands of signatures. Collectively the four got, whatever, 12,000 signatures or something like this. They missed by about 10% of the threshold.
What did Harvard do in the middle of the election? They made it very, very difficult to sign up for a vote and it just makes them look terrible. They’ve got now thousands of alums upset that … Again, this wasn’t an election. This was just to put the names on the slate. The only candidates on the slate are the ones selected by the existing members. Businesses fail because of governance failures. Universities fail because of governance failures. It’s not really the president’s fault, because the job of the board is to hire and fire the president and help guide the institution academically and otherwise. That’s governance.
DEI in universities
I was like, “How can this be?” October 7th, the event that woke me up was 30 student organizations came out with a public letter on October 8th, literally the morning after this letter was created and said, “Israel is solely responsible for Hamas’ violent acts.” Again, Israel had not even mounted a defense at this point, and there were still terrorists running around in the southern part of Israel. I’m like, “34 Harvard student organizations signed this letter?” I’m like, “What is going on? WTF?” That’s when I went up on campus and I started talking to the faculty.
That’s when I started hearing about, actually, Bill, it’s this DEI ideology. I’m like, “What?” Diversity, equity, inclusion. Obviously I’m familiar with these words and I see this in the corporate context. They say, “Yeah.” They started talking to me about this oppressor-oppressed framework, which is effectively taught on campus and represents the backdrop for many of the courses that are offered and some of the studies and other degree offerings. I had not even heard of this and I’m a pretty aware person, but I was completely unaware. Basically they’re like, “Look, Israel is deemed an oppressor and the Palestinians are deemed the oppressed, and you take the side of the oppressed. Any acts of the oppressed to dislodge the oppressor, regardless of how vile or barbaric, are okay.” I’m like, “Okay. This is a super dangerous ideology.”
I wrote a questioning post about this, like, “Here’s what I’m hearing, is this right?” A friend of mine sent me Christopher Rufo’s book, America’s Cultural Revolution, which is sort of a sociological study of the origins of the DEI movement and critical race theory. I found it actually one of the more important books I’ve read and also I found it quite concerning. Ultimately, DEI comes out of a kind of Marxist socialist way to look at the world. I think there are a lot of issues with it, but unfortunately it’s advancing. I, ultimately, concluded racism, as opposed to fighting it, which is what I thought it was ultimately about.
Lex Fridman
Maybe you can speak to that book a little bit. So there’s a history that traces back across decades and then that infiltrated college campuses.
Maybe you can speak to that book a little bit. So there’s a history that traces back across decades and then that infiltrated college campuses.
Bill Ackman
So basically what Rufo argues is that the black power movement of the sixties really failed. It was a very violent movement and many of the protagonists ended up in jail. Out of that movement, a number of thought leaders, this guy named [inaudible 02:24:08] and others built this framework kind of an approach. Said, “Look, if we’re going to be successful, it can’t be a violent movement, number one. Number two, we need to infiltrate, if you will, the universities and we need to become part of the faculty and we need to teach the students. Then once we take over the universities with this ideology, then we can go into government and then we can go into corporations and we can change the world.” I thought important book, and the more I dug in, the more I felt there was credibility to this, not just the kind of sociological backdrop, but to what it meant on campus.
So basically what Rufo argues is that the black power movement of the sixties really failed. It was a very violent movement and many of the protagonists ended up in jail. Out of that movement, a number of thought leaders, this guy named [inaudible 02:24:08] and others built this framework kind of an approach. Said, “Look, if we’re going to be successful, it can’t be a violent movement, number one. Number two, we need to infiltrate, if you will, the universities and we need to become part of the faculty and we need to teach the students. Then once we take over the universities with this ideology, then we can go into government and then we can go into corporations and we can change the world.” I thought important book, and the more I dug in, the more I felt there was credibility to this, not just the kind of sociological backdrop, but to what it meant on campus.
Harvard faculty were telling me that there really is no such thing as free speech on campus and that there was a survey done, a year or so ago, the Harvard faculty and only 2% of the faculty admitted, even in an anonymous survey, admitted to having a conservative point of view. We have a campus that’s 98% non-conservative, liberal, progressive that’s adopted this DEI construct. Then I learned from a member of the search committee for the Harvard president that they were restricted in looking at candidates only those who met the DEI office’s criteria. I shared this in one of my postings and I was accused of being a racist. That’s someone who believes in that diversity is a very good thing for organizations and that equity fairness isn’t really important, and having an inclusive culture is critical for a functioning of a organization. Here I was, someone who was like, “Okay. DEI, sounds good to me,” at least in the small D small E, I version of events, but this DEI ideology is really problematic.
Lex Fridman
What’s the way to fix this in the next few years, the infiltration of DEI with the uppercase version of universities and the things that have troubled you, the things you saw at Harvard and elsewhere.
What’s the way to fix this in the next few years, the infiltration of DEI with the uppercase version of universities and the things that have troubled you, the things you saw at Harvard and elsewhere.
Bill Ackman
The same way this was an eyeopening event for me it has been for a very broad range of other people. I mentioned general growth. I got a lot of nice letters from people from making money on a stock that went up a hundred times. I literally get hundreds of emails, letters, texts, handwritten letters, typed letters from people, from the ages of 25 to 85, saying, “Bill, this is so important. Thanks for speaking out on this. You are saying what so many of us believe but have been afraid to say.”
The same way this was an eyeopening event for me it has been for a very broad range of other people. I mentioned general growth. I got a lot of nice letters from people from making money on a stock that went up a hundred times. I literally get hundreds of emails, letters, texts, handwritten letters, typed letters from people, from the ages of 25 to 85, saying, “Bill, this is so important. Thanks for speaking out on this. You are saying what so many of us believe but have been afraid to say.”
I described it as almost a McCarthy-esque kind of movement in that if you challenge the DEI construct people accuse you of being a racist. It’s happened to me already. Perhaps I’m much less vulnerable than a university professor who can get shouted off campus, canceled. I’m sort of difficult to cancel, but that doesn’t mean people aren’t going to try. I’ve been the victim of a couple of interesting articles in the last few days, or at least one in particular in The Washington Post written by what I thought was a well-meaning reporter. It’s just clear that I’ve taken on some big parts of at least the progressive establishment, DEI. I’m also a believer that Biden should have stepped aside a long time ago, and it’s only getting worse. I’m attacking the president, DEI, elite universities and you make some enemies doing that.
Lex Fridman
I should say, I’m still at MIT and I love MIT. I believe in the power of great universities to explore ideas, to inspire young people to think, to inspire young people to lead.
I should say, I’m still at MIT and I love MIT. I believe in the power of great universities to explore ideas, to inspire young people to think, to inspire young people to lead.
Bill Ackman
Let me ask, okay, how can you explore how to think when you’re only shared a certain point of view? How can you learn about leadership when the governance and leadership at the institution is broken and exposure to ideas, if you’re limited in the ideas that you’re exposed to? I think university is at risk. I mean, the concerning thing is if 34 student organizations that each have, I don’t know, 30 members or maybe more, that’s a thousand. Okay. That’s a meaningful percentage of the campus perhaps that ultimately respond. Now, 10 or so, the 30 withdrew the statement once many of the members realized what they had written. It seems like the statement was signed by their leadership and not necessarily supported by all the various students that were members. If the university teaches people these precepts, this is the next generation of …
Let me ask, okay, how can you explore how to think when you’re only shared a certain point of view? How can you learn about leadership when the governance and leadership at the institution is broken and exposure to ideas, if you’re limited in the ideas that you’re exposed to? I think university is at risk. I mean, the concerning thing is if 34 student organizations that each have, I don’t know, 30 members or maybe more, that’s a thousand. Okay. That’s a meaningful percentage of the campus perhaps that ultimately respond. Now, 10 or so, the 30 withdrew the statement once many of the members realized what they had written. It seems like the statement was signed by their leadership and not necessarily supported by all the various students that were members. If the university teaches people these precepts, this is the next generation of …
I wrote my college thesis on university admissions. The reason why controlling the gates of the Harvard institution, the admissions office is important, is that many of these people who graduate end up with the top jobs in government and ultimately become judges, they permeate through society and so it really matters what they learn. If they’re limited to one side of the political aisle and they’re not open to a broad array of views, and this represents some of the most elite institutions in our country, I think it’s very problematic for the country, long term.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I 100% agree. I also felt like the leadership wasn’t even part of the problem as much as they were almost out of touch, unaware that this is an important moment, it’s an important crisis, it’s an important opportunity to step up as a leader and define the future of an institution. I don’t even know where the source of the problem is. It could be, literally, governance structure as we’ve been talking about.
Yeah, I 100% agree. I also felt like the leadership wasn’t even part of the problem as much as they were almost out of touch, unaware that this is an important moment, it’s an important crisis, it’s an important opportunity to step up as a leader and define the future of an institution. I don’t even know where the source of the problem is. It could be, literally, governance structure as we’ve been talking about.
Bill Ackman
Well, it’s two things. I think it’s governance structure. I also think universities, they’re not selecting leaders. It’s not clear to me that universities should necessarily be run by academics. The dean of a university, the person who helps … There’s sort of the business of the university, and then there’s the academics of the university. I would argue having a business leader run these institutions and then having a board that has, itself, diverse viewpoints, and by the way, permanently structured to have diverse viewpoints is a much better way to run a university than picking an academic that the faculty supports.
Well, it’s two things. I think it’s governance structure. I also think universities, they’re not selecting leaders. It’s not clear to me that universities should necessarily be run by academics. The dean of a university, the person who helps … There’s sort of the business of the university, and then there’s the academics of the university. I would argue having a business leader run these institutions and then having a board that has, itself, diverse viewpoints, and by the way, permanently structured to have diverse viewpoints is a much better way to run a university than picking an academic that the faculty supports.
One of the things I learned about how faculty get hired at universities, ultimately, it’s signed off by the board, but the new faculty are chosen by each of the various departments. There’s sort of a tipping point, politically, where once they tip in one direction, the faculty recruit more people like themselves. The departments become more and more progressive, if you will, with the passage of time. They only advance candidates that meet their political objectives. It’s not a great way to build an institution, which allows for …
Lex Fridman
Small D, diversity
Small D, diversity
Bill Ackman
Allows for diversity. Diversity by the way, is not just race and gender. That’s also something I feel very strongly about.
Allows for diversity. Diversity by the way, is not just race and gender. That’s also something I feel very strongly about.
Lex Fridman
Well, luckily, engineering robotics is touched last by this. It is touched. When I am at the computing building [inaudible 02:32:11] and the new one, politics doesn’t infiltrate, or I haven’t seen it infiltrate quite as deeply as elsewhere.
Well, luckily, engineering robotics is touched last by this. It is touched. When I am at the computing building [inaudible 02:32:11] and the new one, politics doesn’t infiltrate, or I haven’t seen it infiltrate quite as deeply as elsewhere.
Bill Ackman
It’s in the biology department at Harvard because biology is controversial now.
It’s in the biology department at Harvard because biology is controversial now.
Lex Fridman
Yes. Yes, yes.
Yes. Yes, yes.
Bill Ackman
Because biology and gender, there are faculty … There’s a woman at Harvard who was literally canceled from the faculty as a member. I think she was at the med school. She made the argument that there are basically two genders determined by biology. She wasn’t allowed to stay. That’s another topic for another time.
Because biology and gender, there are faculty … There’s a woman at Harvard who was literally canceled from the faculty as a member. I think she was at the med school. She made the argument that there are basically two genders determined by biology. She wasn’t allowed to stay. That’s another topic for another time.
Lex Fridman
That’s another topic.
That’s another topic.
Bill Ackman
You should do a show on that one. That’d be an interesting one.
You should do a show on that one. That’d be an interesting one.
Lex Fridman
So as you said, technically Claudine Gay, the president of Harvard resigned over plagiarism, not over the thing that you were initially troubled by.
So as you said, technically Claudine Gay, the president of Harvard resigned over plagiarism, not over the thing that you were initially troubled by.
Bill Ackman
It’s hard to really know, right? It’s not like a provable fact. I would say at a certain point in time, she lost the confidence of the faculty, and that was ultimately the catalyst. How much of that was the plagiarism issue, and how much of that was some of the things that preceded it, or was it all of these issues in their entirety? There’s no way to do a calculus.
It’s hard to really know, right? It’s not like a provable fact. I would say at a certain point in time, she lost the confidence of the faculty, and that was ultimately the catalyst. How much of that was the plagiarism issue, and how much of that was some of the things that preceded it, or was it all of these issues in their entirety? There’s no way to do a calculus.
Lex Fridman
Can you explain the nature of this plagiarism from what you remember?
Can you explain the nature of this plagiarism from what you remember?
Bill Ackman
Aaron Sibarium and Christopher Rufo, one from The Free Beacon, and Chris, surfaced some allegations, or identified some pleasures in the issues that I would say the initial examples were use of the same words with proper attribution, some missing footnotes. Then over time with, I guess, more digging, they released I think ultimately something like 76 examples of what they call plagiarism in I think eight of 11 of her articles. One of the other things that came forth here is, as president of the university, she had sort of the thinnest transcript academically of any previous president, relatively small body of work. Then when you couple that with the amount of plagiarism that was pervasive. Then I guess some of the other examples that surfaced were not missing quotation marks where the authors of the work felt that their ideas had been stolen.
Aaron Sibarium and Christopher Rufo, one from The Free Beacon, and Chris, surfaced some allegations, or identified some pleasures in the issues that I would say the initial examples were use of the same words with proper attribution, some missing footnotes. Then over time with, I guess, more digging, they released I think ultimately something like 76 examples of what they call plagiarism in I think eight of 11 of her articles. One of the other things that came forth here is, as president of the university, she had sort of the thinnest transcript academically of any previous president, relatively small body of work. Then when you couple that with the amount of plagiarism that was pervasive. Then I guess some of the other examples that surfaced were not missing quotation marks where the authors of the work felt that their ideas had been stolen.
Really, plagiarism is academic fraud. One indicia of plagiarism is a missing footnote, that could also be a clerical error. When a professor’s accused of plagiarism, the university does sort of a deep dive. They have these administrative boards. It can take six months, nine months, a year to evaluate … Intent matters. Was this intentional theft of another person’s idea? That’s academic fraud. Or was this sloppy or just humanity? You miss a footnote here or there. I think once it got …
Bill Ackman
It’s a footnote here or there. And I think once it got to a place where people felt it was theft of someone else’s intellectual property, that’s when it became intolerable for her to stay as President of Harvard.
It’s a footnote here or there. And I think once it got to a place where people felt it was theft of someone else’s intellectual property, that’s when it became intolerable for her to stay as President of Harvard.
Lex Fridman
So is there a spectrum for you between a different kinds of plagiarism, maybe be plagiarizing words, and plagiarizing ideas, and plagiarizing novel ideas?
So is there a spectrum for you between a different kinds of plagiarism, maybe be plagiarizing words, and plagiarizing ideas, and plagiarizing novel ideas?
Bill Ackman
Of course. The common understanding of plagiarism, if you look in the dictionary, it’s about the theft. Theft requires a intent. Did the person intentionally take someone else’s ideas or words?
Of course. The common understanding of plagiarism, if you look in the dictionary, it’s about the theft. Theft requires a intent. Did the person intentionally take someone else’s ideas or words?
Now if you’re writing a novel, words matter more. If you’re taking Shakespeare and presenting it as your own words. If you’re writing about ideas, ideas matter, but you’re not supposed to take someone else’s words without properly acknowledging them, whether it’s quotation marks or otherwise.
But in the context of a academic’s life’s work before AI, everyone’s going to have missing quotation marks and footnotes. I remember writing my own thesis, there were books you couldn’t take out a Widener Library, so I’d have index cards. And I’d write stuff on index cards, and I put a little citation to make sure I remember to cite it properly.
And scrambling to do your thesis, get it in on time, what’s the chances you forget at what point, what are your words versus the author’s words? And you forget to put quotation marks. Just the humanity, the human fallibility of it. So it’s not academic fraud to have human fallibility, but it’s academic fraud. If you take someone else’s ideas that are an integral part of your work.
Lex Fridman
Is there a part of you that regrets that, at least from the perception of it, the President Harvard stepped on over plagiarism versus over refusing to say that the calls for genocide are wrong?
Is there a part of you that regrets that, at least from the perception of it, the President Harvard stepped on over plagiarism versus over refusing to say that the calls for genocide are wrong?
Bill Ackman
Again, I think it would’ve sent a better message if a leader fails as a leader, and that’s the reason for their resignation or dismissal. Then she gets, if you will, caught on a technical violation that had nothing to do with failed leadership. Because I don’t know what lesson that teaches the board about selecting the next candidate.
Again, I think it would’ve sent a better message if a leader fails as a leader, and that’s the reason for their resignation or dismissal. Then she gets, if you will, caught on a technical violation that had nothing to do with failed leadership. Because I don’t know what lesson that teaches the board about selecting the next candidate.
I mean, the future of Harvard, A lot of it’s going to depend on who they pick as the next leader. Here’s an interesting anecdote that I think has not surfaced publicly. So a guy named Larry Bacow was the previous president of Harvard. Larry Bacow was on the search committee, and they were looking for a new president. And what was strange was they picked an old white guy to be president of Harvard when there was a call for a more diverse president.
And what I learned was Harvard actually ran a process, had a diverse new president of Harvard, and in the due diligence on that candidate, shortly before the announcement of the new president, they found out that that presidential candidate had a plagiarism problem. And the search had gone on long enough, they couldn’t restart a search to find another candidate.
So they picked Larry Bacow off the board, off the search committee to the next president Harvard, as kind of an interim solution. And then there was that much more pressure to have a more diverse candidate this time around, because it was a big disappointment to the DEI office, if you will, and I would say to the community at large. That Harvard of all places couldn’t have a racially-diverse present. It sent an important message.
So the strange thing is that they didn’t do due diligence on President Gay, and that it was a relatively quick process. So the whole thing I think is worthy of further exploration.
Lex Fridman
So this goes deeper than just the president?
So this goes deeper than just the president?
Bill Ackman
Yes, for sure. When a company fails, most people blame the CEO. I generally blame the board. Because the board’s job is to make sure the right person’s running the company, and if they’re failing, help the person. If they can’t help the person, make a change. That’s not what’s happened here. The board’s hand was sort of forced from the outside, whereas they should have made their own decision from the inside.
Yes, for sure. When a company fails, most people blame the CEO. I generally blame the board. Because the board’s job is to make sure the right person’s running the company, and if they’re failing, help the person. If they can’t help the person, make a change. That’s not what’s happened here. The board’s hand was sort of forced from the outside, whereas they should have made their own decision from the inside.
Lex Fridman
Do you still love Harvard?
Do you still love Harvard?
Bill Ackman
Sure. It’s a 400-odd year institution. Enormously helpful to me in my life, I’m sure. My sister also went to Harvard. And the experiences, learnings, friendships, relationships. Again, I’m very happy with my life. Harvard was an important part of my life, I went there for both undergrad and business school. I learned a ton, met a lot of faculty. A number of my closest friends who I still really keep in touch with, I made then. So yeah, it’s a great place, but it needs a reboot.
Sure. It’s a 400-odd year institution. Enormously helpful to me in my life, I’m sure. My sister also went to Harvard. And the experiences, learnings, friendships, relationships. Again, I’m very happy with my life. Harvard was an important part of my life, I went there for both undergrad and business school. I learned a ton, met a lot of faculty. A number of my closest friends who I still really keep in touch with, I made then. So yeah, it’s a great place, but it needs a reboot.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, I still have hope. I think universities are really important institutions.
Yeah, I still have hope. I think universities are really important institutions.
Bill Ackman
When I went to Harvard, there were 1600 people in my class. I think today’s class about the same size, and their online education really has not taken off. So I heard Peter Thiel speak at one point in time, and he’s like, “What great institution do you know, that’s truly great, that hasn’t grown in a hundred years?”
When I went to Harvard, there were 1600 people in my class. I think today’s class about the same size, and their online education really has not taken off. So I heard Peter Thiel speak at one point in time, and he’s like, “What great institution do you know, that’s truly great, that hasn’t grown in a hundred years?”
And the incentives in some sense of the alums are for, it’s a bit like a club. If you’re proud of the elitism of the club, you don’t want that many new members. But the fact that the population has grown of the country so significantly since, certainly, I was a student in 1984, and the fact that Harvard recruits people from all over the world, it’s really serving a smaller and smaller percentage of the population today.
And some of them were most talented and successful entrepreneurs anyway. It’s a token of success that they didn’t make it through their undergraduate years. They left as a freshman, or they didn’t attend at all.
Lex Fridman
For entrepreneurs, yes. But it’s still a place…
For entrepreneurs, yes. But it’s still a place…
Bill Ackman
Very important for research, very important for advancing ideas. And yes, in shaping dialogue and the next generation of Supreme Court justices, and the members of government, politicians. So yes, it’s critically important. But it’s not doing the job it should be doing.
Very important for research, very important for advancing ideas. And yes, in shaping dialogue and the next generation of Supreme Court justices, and the members of government, politicians. So yes, it’s critically important. But it’s not doing the job it should be doing.
Neri Oxman
Lex Fridman
Neri Oxman, somebody you mentioned several times throughout this podcast, somebody I had a wonderful conversation with, a friendship with. I’ve looked up to her, admired her, I’ve been a fan of hers for a long time, of her work and of her as a human being. Looks like you’re a fan of hers as well.
Neri Oxman, somebody you mentioned several times throughout this podcast, somebody I had a wonderful conversation with, a friendship with. I’ve looked up to her, admired her, I’ve been a fan of hers for a long time, of her work and of her as a human being. Looks like you’re a fan of hers as well.
Bill Ackman
Yes. W.
Yes. W.
Lex Fridman
Hat do you love about Neri? What do you admire about her as a scientist, artist, human being?
Hat do you love about Neri? What do you admire about her as a scientist, artist, human being?
Bill Ackman
I think she’s the most beautiful person I’ve ever met, and I mean that from the center of her soul. She’s the most caring, warm, considerate, thoughtful person I’ve ever met. And she couples those remarkable qualities with brilliance, incredible creativity, beauty, elegance, grace. I’m talking about my wife, but I’m talking incredibly dispassionately.
I think she’s the most beautiful person I’ve ever met, and I mean that from the center of her soul. She’s the most caring, warm, considerate, thoughtful person I’ve ever met. And she couples those remarkable qualities with brilliance, incredible creativity, beauty, elegance, grace. I’m talking about my wife, but I’m talking incredibly dispassionately.
But I mean what I say. She’s the most remarkable person I’ve ever met, and I’ve met a lot of remarkable people, and I’m incredibly fortunate to spend a very high percentage of my lifetime with her, ever since I met her six years ago.
Lex Fridman
So she’s been a help to you through some of the rough moments you described.
So she’s been a help to you through some of the rough moments you described.
Bill Ackman
For sure. I mean, I met her at the bottom. Which is not a bad place to meet someone if it works out.
For sure. I mean, I met her at the bottom. Which is not a bad place to meet someone if it works out.
Lex Fridman
Is there some degree of yin and yang with the two personalities? You have described yourself as emotional and so on, but it does seem the two of you have slightly different styles about how you approach the world.
Is there some degree of yin and yang with the two personalities? You have described yourself as emotional and so on, but it does seem the two of you have slightly different styles about how you approach the world.
Bill Ackman
Sure. Well, interestingly, we have a lot of, we come from very similar places in the world. There are times where you feel like we’ve known each other for centuries.
Sure. Well, interestingly, we have a lot of, we come from very similar places in the world. There are times where you feel like we’ve known each other for centuries.
I met her parents for the first time a long time ago, almost six years ago as well. And I knew her parents were from Eastern Europe, originally. So I asked her father, what city did her family come from originally? And I called my father and asked him, “Dad, Grandpa Abraham, what’s the name of the city?” And then I put the two cities into Google Maps, and they were 52 miles apart. Which I thought was pretty cool.
Then of course at some point we did genetic testing, make sure we weren’t related, which we were not. But we share incredible commonality on values. We are attracted to the same kind of people. She loves my friends, I love hers. We love doing the same kind of things, we like spending time the same ways.
And she has more emotion, more elegance. She doesn’t like battles, but she’s very strong. But she’s more sensitive than I am.
Lex Fridman
Yeah, you are constantly in multiple battles at the same time, and there’s often the media, social media, it’s just fire everywhere.
Yeah, you are constantly in multiple battles at the same time, and there’s often the media, social media, it’s just fire everywhere.
Bill Ackman
That hasn’t really been the case for a while. I’ve had relative peace for a long time as I stopped being, as I haven’t had to be the kind of activist I was earlier in my career. I think since October 7th, yes, I do feel like I’ve been in a war.
That hasn’t really been the case for a while. I’ve had relative peace for a long time as I stopped being, as I haven’t had to be the kind of activist I was earlier in my career. I think since October 7th, yes, I do feel like I’ve been in a war.
Lex Fridman
Can you tell me the saga of the accusations against Neri?
Can you tell me the saga of the accusations against Neri?
Bill Ackman
So I did not actually surface the plagiarism allegations against President Gay that surfaced by Aaron and maybe Christopher Ruffo as well, or maybe Chris helped promote what Aaron and some anonymous person identified. But I certainly, it was a point in time where the board had said “We’re a hundred percent behind her,” and unanimously. And I really felt she had to go. So it didn’t bother me at all that they had identified problems with her work.
So I did not actually surface the plagiarism allegations against President Gay that surfaced by Aaron and maybe Christopher Ruffo as well, or maybe Chris helped promote what Aaron and some anonymous person identified. But I certainly, it was a point in time where the board had said “We’re a hundred percent behind her,” and unanimously. And I really felt she had to go. So it didn’t bother me at all that they had identified problems with her work.
So I shared, I reposted those posts. And then when the board, she ultimately resigned and she got a $900,000 a year professorship continuing at Harvard, I said, look, in light of her limited academic record and these plagiarism allegations, she had to go.
I knew when I did so, I assumed I was actually a bit paranoid about that thesis I had written. I only had one academic work, but I hadn’t checked it for plagiarism. And I thought, that’s going to happen. Actually, I had someone, I did not have a copy on hand, so I got a copy of my thesis.
And I remember writing it, Harvard at the time was pretty, they kind of gave you a lecture about making sure you have all your footnotes and quotation marks. I learned later that apparently they had a copy of my thesis at the New York Public Library, and a member of the media told me he was there online with a dozen other members of the media all trying to get a copy of my thesis to run it through some AI. They had to first do optical character recognition to convert the paper document into digital.
But fortunately, through a miracle, I didn’t have an issue. I didn’t think about Neri of course, who has whatever, 130 academic works.
And so we were just at the end of a vacation for Christmas break, and it was early in the morning for a vacation time. And all of a sudden I hear my phone ringing in the other room, or vibrating in the other room multiple times. I’m like, hm.
I pick up the phone and saw our communication guy, Fran McGill. And he’s like, “Bill, Business Insider has apparently identified a number of instances of plagiarism in Neri’s dissertation. Let me send you this email.”
He sent me the email, and they had identified four paragraphs in her 330- page dissertation where she had cited the author, but she had used the vast majority of the words, and that those paragraphs were from the author, and she should have used quotation marks.
And then there was one case where she paraphrased correctly an author, but did not footnote that it was from his work.
And so we were presented with this and told, they’re going to publish in a few hours. And we’re like, “Well, can we get to the next day? We’re just about to head home.”
And they’re like, “No, we’re publishing by noon. We need an answer by noon.”
And so we downloaded the copy of her thesis on the slow internet. And Neri checked it out and she said, “You know what? Looks like they’re right.”
And I said, “Look, you should just admit your mistake.”
And she wrote a very simple, gracious, yes, I should have used quotation marks. And on the author I failed to cite, she pointed out that she cited them eight other times, and wrote a several-paragraph section of her thesis acknowledging his work.
And none of these were important parts of her thesis. But she acknowledged her mistake and she said, I apologize for my mistake, and I apologized to the author who I failed to cite. And I stand on the shoulders of all the people came before me, and looking to advance work. And we sort of thought it was over.
We head home. In-flight on the way home, although we didn’t realize this until we got back the following day, a Business Insider published another article and said, “Neri Oxman admits to plagiarism.” Plagiarism, of course, is academic fraud. And this thing goes crazy viral.
Oh, Bill Ackman the title is Bill Ackman’s Wife, Celebrity Academic, Mary Oxman. And they use the term celebrity because there are limits to what legitimate media can go after, but celebrities, there’s a lot more leeway in the media into what they can say. So that’s why they call her a celebrity. First time ever she’d been called a celebrity. And they basically, she’s admitting to academic fraud. And then they said … And then the next day at 5:19 PM, I remember the timeline pretty well, an email was sent to Fran McGill saying, “We’ve identified two dozen other instances of plagiarism in her work.” 15 of which are Wikipedia entries where she copied definitions, and the others were mostly software-hardware manuals for various devices or software she used in her work, most of which were in footnotes where she described a nozzle for a 3D printer or something like this.
And they said, “We’re publishing tonight.” The email they sent to us was 6,900 words. It was 12 pages. It was practically indecipherable. You couldn’t even read it in an hour. And we didn’t have some of the documents they were referring to.
And I’m like, “Neri, you know what I’m going to do? I think it’ll be useful to provide context here. I’m going to do a review of every MIT professor’s dissertations. Every published paper. AI has enabled this.”
And so that was, I put out a tweet basically saying that. And we’re doing a test run now, because we have to get it right, and I think it’ll be a useful exercise. Provide some context, if you will. And then this thing goes crazy viral. And Neri is a pretty sensitive person, pretty emotional person, and someone who’s a perfectionist. And having everyone in the world thinking you committed academic fraud is a pretty damning thing.
Now, they did say they did a thorough review of all of her work, and this is what they found. I’m like, sweetheart, that’s remarkable. I did 130 works, 73 of which were peer-reviewed, blah, blah, blah. And she’s published in Nature Science and all these different publications. That’s actually, it’s a pretty good batting average.
But this is wrong, this is not academic fraud. These are inadvertent mistakes. And the Wikipedia entries, Neri actually used Wikipedia as a dictionary. This is the early days of Wikipedia. And they also referred to the MIT handbook, which has a whole section on plagiarism, academic handbook.
And if you read it, which I ultimately did, they make clear a few things. Number one, there’s plagiarism, academic fraud. And there’s what they call inadvertent plagiarism, which is clerical errors where you make a mistake, and it depends on intent. And there’s a link that you can go to, which is a section on, if you get investigated at MIT, what happens? What’s the procedure, what’s the initial stage, what’s the investigative stage, what’s the procedure if they identify it? And they make very clear that academic fraud is, and they list plagiarism, research theft, a few other things, but it does not include honest errors. Honest errors are not plagiarism under MIT’s own policies.
And in the handbook, they also have a big section of what they call common knowledge. And common knowledge depends on who you’re writing your thesis for. And so if it’s a fact that is known by your audience, you’re not required to quote or cite.
And so all those Wikipedia entries were for things like sustainable design, computer-aided design. She just took a definition from Wikipedia, common knowledge to her readers, no obligation under the handbook, totally exempt.
On using the same words, she referred to whatever, some kind of 3D printer. She was, the Stratasys 3D Printer, and she quoted from the manual. Right away, Stratasys is a company you consulted for. That’s not something, you’re not stealing their ideas, you’re describing a nozzle for a device you use in your work in a footnote. That’s not a theft of idea.
And so I’m like, this is crazy. And so this has got to stop. And so I reach out to a guy I knew who was on the board of Business Insider, the chairman, and his name is going to come public shortly. I committed at that time to keep his name confidential, it’s now surfaced publicly in the press.
Lex Fridman
Can I just pause real quick here?
Can I just pause real quick here?
Bill Ackman
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
Just to, I don’t know. There’s a lot of things I want to say. But you made it pretty clear. But just as a member of the community, there’s also a common sense test. I think you’re more precisely legal in looking at…
Just to, I don’t know. There’s a lot of things I want to say. But you made it pretty clear. But just as a member of the community, there’s also a common sense test. I think you’re more precisely legal in looking at…
Bill Ackman
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
But there’s just a bullshit test. And nothing that Neri did is plagiarism in the bad meaning of the word. Plagiarism right now is becoming another -ism, like racism or so on, used as an attack word. I don’t care what the meaning of it is, but there’s the bad academic fraud like theft, theft of an idea. And maybe you can say a lot of definitions and this kind of stuff. But then there’s just a basic bullshit test where everyone knows, this is a thief and this is definitely not a thief.
But there’s just a bullshit test. And nothing that Neri did is plagiarism in the bad meaning of the word. Plagiarism right now is becoming another -ism, like racism or so on, used as an attack word. I don’t care what the meaning of it is, but there’s the bad academic fraud like theft, theft of an idea. And maybe you can say a lot of definitions and this kind of stuff. But then there’s just a basic bullshit test where everyone knows, this is a thief and this is definitely not a thief.
And there’s nothing about anything that Neri did, anything in her thesis or in her life. Everyone that knows her, she’s a rock star. I just want to make it clear, it really hurt me that the internet, whatever is happening, could go after a great scientist. Because I love science, and I love celebrating great scientists.
And it’s just really messed up that whatever the machine, we can talk about Business Insider or whatever, social media, mass hysteria, whatever is happening. We need the great scientists of the world, because the future depends on them. And so we need to celebrate them, and protect them, and let them flourish and do their thing.
And keep them out of this whatever shit-storm that we’re doing to get clicks, and advertisements, and drama and all this. We need to protect them. So I just want to say there’s nobody I know, and I have a million friends that are scientists, world-class scientists, Nobel Prize winners, they all love Neri, they all respect Neri, she did zero wrong.
And then the rest of the conversation we’re going to have about how broken journalism is, and so on. But I just want to say that there’s nothing that Neri did wrong. It’s not a gray area or so on.
I also personally don’t love that Claudine Gay is a discussion about plagiarism, because it distracts from the fundamentals that is broken, it becomes some weird technical discussion. But in case of Neri, did nothing wrong. Great scientist, great engineer at MIT and beyond. She’s doing the cool thing now.
Bill Ackman
Could not have said it better myself. Now, obviously I’m focusing the technical part…
Could not have said it better myself. Now, obviously I’m focusing the technical part…
Lex Fridman
Right. Because you have to be precise here.
Right. Because you have to be precise here.
Bill Ackman
Well, it’s not even that. I mean, yes, I have said that we’re going to sue Business Insider. And in 35 years of my career of someone who has, not every article has been a favorable one, not every article has been an accurate one, I’ve never threatened to sue the media. And I’ve never sued the media. But this is so egregious.
Well, it’s not even that. I mean, yes, I have said that we’re going to sue Business Insider. And in 35 years of my career of someone who has, not every article has been a favorable one, not every article has been an accurate one, I’ve never threatened to sue the media. And I’ve never sued the media. But this is so egregious.
It’s not just that she did nothing wrong, but they accused her of academic fraud. They did it knowing, they make reference to MIT’s own handbook so they had to read all the same stuff that I read in the handbook, they did that work. Then, after I escalated this thing to Henry Blodget, the chairman of Business Insider, to the CEO of Axel Springer, I even reached out to Henry Kravis at a certain point in time, one of the controlling shareholders of the company through KKR, laying out the factual errors in the article.
Business Insider went public after they said Neri committed academic fraud and plagiarism. And said, we didn’t challenge any, the facts remain undisputed in the article.
So it’s basically, Neri committed plagiarism. That’s story one. Neri admits to plagiarism. She admits to plagiarism. She admitted to making a few clerical errors, that’s the only thing she admitted to, and she graciously apologized.
So they said, “Neri admits to plagiarism, apologizes for plagiarism.” That’s incredibly damning. ” And by the way, we’re doing an investigation because we’re concerned that there might’ve been inappropriate process, but the facts of the story have not been disputed by Neri Oxman or Bill Ackman.”
And that was totally false. I had done it privately, I’d done it publicly on Twitter, on X. I laid out, I have a whole tech stream, a WhatsApp stream with the CEO of the company. And they doubled down, and they doubled down again.
And so, I don’t sue people lightly. And stay tuned.
Lex Fridman
So you’re, at least for now, moving forward with…
So you’re, at least for now, moving forward with…
Bill Ackman
It’s a certainty we’re moving forward. There’s a step we can take prior to suing them, where we basically send them a letter demanding they make a series of corrections. That if they don’t make those corrections, the next step is litigation. I hope we can avoid the next step.
It’s a certainty we’re moving forward. There’s a step we can take prior to suing them, where we basically send them a letter demanding they make a series of corrections. That if they don’t make those corrections, the next step is litigation. I hope we can avoid the next step.
And I’m just making sure that when we present the demand to Business Insider, and ultimately to Axel Springer, that it’s incredibly clear how they defamed her, the factual mistakes in our stories, and what they need to do to fix it. And if we can fix it there, we can move on from this episode and hopefully avoid litigation. So that’s where we are.
Lex Fridman
I don’t know. You’re smarter than me. There’s technical stuff, there’s legal stuff, there’s journalistic stuff. But just, fuck you Business Insider for doing this. I don’t know much in this world, but journalists aren’t supposed to do that.
I don’t know. You’re smarter than me. There’s technical stuff, there’s legal stuff, there’s journalistic stuff. But just, fuck you Business Insider for doing this. I don’t know much in this world, but journalists aren’t supposed to do that.
Bill Ackman
Now look, we’re going to surface all this stuff publicly, ultimately. The email was not to Neri saying there was plagiarism in her work. The email came from a reporter named Catherine Long, and the headline was, “Your wife committed plagiarism. Shouldn’t she be fired from MIT, just like you caused Claudine Gay to be fired from Harvard?”
Now look, we’re going to surface all this stuff publicly, ultimately. The email was not to Neri saying there was plagiarism in her work. The email came from a reporter named Catherine Long, and the headline was, “Your wife committed plagiarism. Shouldn’t she be fired from MIT, just like you caused Claudine Gay to be fired from Harvard?”
It was a political agenda. She doesn’t like me, and she was trying to hurt me, and they couldn’t find plagiarism in my thesis. And being a short seller, the Herbalife battle went on for years. They tried to do everything to destroy my reputation. So they’d already gone through my trash, they’d already done all that work. So anything they could possibly find, I’ve always lived a very clean life, thankfully. And if you’re going to be an activist short seller, you better. Because they’re going to find out dirt on you if it exists. And so they’re like, how can we really hurt Bill?
And by the way, Neri had left MIT years earlier. When the reporter found out she was no longer a member of the MIT faculty, they were enraged. They didn’t believe us. They made us prove to us she’s no longer on the MIT faculty, because they wanted to get her fired. And by the way, malice is one of the important factors in determining whether defamation is taking place. And this was a malice- driven, this was not about news.
And the unfortunate thing about journalism is Business Insider made a fortune from this. This story was published and republished by thousands of media organizations around the world. It was the number one trending thing on Twitter for two days. Every newspaper, it was on the front page of every Israeli newspaper, it was on the front page of the Financial Times.
And she’s building a business. And if you’re a CEO of a science company and you committed academic fraud, that’s incredibly damaging. But I ultimately convinced her that this was good.
I said, “Sweetheart, you’re amazing. You’re incredible. You’re incredibly talented, but you’re mostly known in the design world. Now everyone in the universe has heard of Neri Oxman. We’re going to get this thing cleared up. You’re going to be doing an event in six months where you’re going to tell the world, you’re going to go out of stealth mode, you’re going to tell the world about all the incredible things that you’re building, and you’re designing, and you’re creating. And it’s going to be like the iPhone launch, because everyone’s going to be paying attention and they’re going to want to see your work.”
And that’s how I try to cheer her up. But I think it’s true.
Lex Fridman
It is true. And you’re doing your job as a good partner, seeing the silver lining of all this. How is, just from observing her, how did she stay strong through all of this psychologically? Because at least I know she’s pushing ahead with the work.
It is true. And you’re doing your job as a good partner, seeing the silver lining of all this. How is, just from observing her, how did she stay strong through all of this psychologically? Because at least I know she’s pushing ahead with the work.
Bill Ackman
Oh, she’s full speed ahead in her work. She’s built an amazing team, she’s hired 30 scientists, roboticists, people who, biologists, plant specialists, material scientists, engineers, really incredible crew. She’s built this 36,000 square-foot lab in New York City that’s one of a kind, they’re working out of it. It’s still under construction while they’re working out of it.
Oh, she’s full speed ahead in her work. She’s built an amazing team, she’s hired 30 scientists, roboticists, people who, biologists, plant specialists, material scientists, engineers, really incredible crew. She’s built this 36,000 square-foot lab in New York City that’s one of a kind, they’re working out of it. It’s still under construction while they’re working out of it.
And so she’s going to do amazing things. But as I said, she’s an extremely sensitive person. She’s a perfectionist. Okay? Imagine thinking that the entire world thinks you committed academic fraud. And so that was very hard for her.
She’s a very positive person. But I saw her in, I would say, her darkest emotional period for sure. She’s doing much better now. But you can kill someone. You can kill someone by destroying their reputation. People commit suicide. People go into these deep, dark depression.
Lex Fridman
Well my worry, primarily, when I saw what Business Insider was doing, is that they might dim the light of a truly special scientist and creator.
Well my worry, primarily, when I saw what Business Insider was doing, is that they might dim the light of a truly special scientist and creator.
Bill Ackman
It’s not going to happen.
It’s not going to happen.
Lex Fridman
But I also worry about others like Neri, young Neris, that this sends a signal that might scare them. And journalism shouldn’t scare aspiring young scientists.
But I also worry about others like Neri, young Neris, that this sends a signal that might scare them. And journalism shouldn’t scare aspiring young scientists.
Bill Ackman
The problem is the defamation law in the US is so favorable to the publisher, to the media, and so unfavorable to the victim. And the incentives are all wrong.
The problem is the defamation law in the US is so favorable to the publisher, to the media, and so unfavorable to the victim. And the incentives are all wrong.
When you went from a paper version of journalism to digital, and you could track how many people click, and it’s a medium that advertising drives the economics. And if you can show an advertiser more clicks, you can make more money. So a journalist is incentivized to write a story that will generate more clicks. How do you write a story that generate more clicks? You get a billionaire guy, and then you go after his wife, and you make a sensationalist story. And you give them no time to respond, right?
Look at the timing here. On the first story, they gave us three hours. On the second one, the following day, 5:19 PM, the email comes in not to Neri, not to her firm, but to my communications person. Who tracks us down by 5:30, 10 minutes later. And they publish their story 92 minutes after.
And they sent us, “We’re going to surface all these documents in our demand.” Read the email they sent, whether you could even decipher it. There was no … And by the way, there’s a reason why academic institutions, when a professor’s accused…
Bill Ackman
The reason why academic institutions, when a professors accused of plagiarism, why they have these very careful processes with multiple stages and they can take a year or more because it depends on intent. Was this intentional? In order to be a crime, an academic crime, you got to prove that they intentionally stole. Look, in some cases it’s obvious. In some cases it’s very subtle and they take this stuff super seriously, but they basically accused Neri of academic crime. And then 92 minutes later, they said she committed an academic crime and that should be a crime and that should be punishable with litigation. And there should be a real cost. And we’re going to make sure there’s a real cost, reputationally and otherwise, to Business Insider and to Axel Springer. Because ultimately you got to look to the controlling owner. They’re responsible.
The reason why academic institutions, when a professors accused of plagiarism, why they have these very careful processes with multiple stages and they can take a year or more because it depends on intent. Was this intentional? In order to be a crime, an academic crime, you got to prove that they intentionally stole. Look, in some cases it’s obvious. In some cases it’s very subtle and they take this stuff super seriously, but they basically accused Neri of academic crime. And then 92 minutes later, they said she committed an academic crime and that should be a crime and that should be punishable with litigation. And there should be a real cost. And we’re going to make sure there’s a real cost, reputationally and otherwise, to Business Insider and to Axel Springer. Because ultimately you got to look to the controlling owner. They’re responsible.
Lex Fridman
I’ll just say that you in this regard are inspiring to me for facing basically an institution that whole purpose is to write articles. So you’re like going into the fire.
I’ll just say that you in this regard are inspiring to me for facing basically an institution that whole purpose is to write articles. So you’re like going into the fire.
X and free speech
Bill Ackman
My kid’s school, the epithet of the school, or the saying is go forth unafraid. I think it’s a good way to live. And again, words can’t harm me. The power of X, And we do owe Elon enormous thanks for this is now, so for example, the Washington Post wrote a story about me a couple days ago, and I didn’t think the story was a fair story. So within a few hours of the story being written, I’m able to put out a response to the story and send it to 1,200,000 people. And it gets read and reread. I haven’t checked, but probably 5 million people saw my response. Now, those are the people on X, It’s not everyone in the world. There’s a disconnection between the X world and the offline world. But reputation in my business is basically all you have. And as they say, you can take a lifetime to build a reputation and take five minutes to have a disappear.
My kid’s school, the epithet of the school, or the saying is go forth unafraid. I think it’s a good way to live. And again, words can’t harm me. The power of X, And we do owe Elon enormous thanks for this is now, so for example, the Washington Post wrote a story about me a couple days ago, and I didn’t think the story was a fair story. So within a few hours of the story being written, I’m able to put out a response to the story and send it to 1,200,000 people. And it gets read and reread. I haven’t checked, but probably 5 million people saw my response. Now, those are the people on X, It’s not everyone in the world. There’s a disconnection between the X world and the offline world. But reputation in my business is basically all you have. And as they say, you can take a lifetime to build a reputation and take five minutes to have a disappear.
And the media plays a very important role and they can destroy people. At least we now have some ability to fight back. We have a platform, we can surface our views. The typical old days, they write an incredibly damning article and you point out factual errors and then two months later they bury a little correction on page, whatever. By then the person was fired where their life was destroyed or the reputation’s damaged. It was with Warren Buffett talking about media, and it’s a business he really loves. He says, “You know what, Bill?” He said, “A thief with a dagger. The only person who cause you more harm than a thief with a dagger is a journalist with a pen.” And those were very powerful words.
Lex Fridman
So you think X, formerly known as Twitter, is a kind of neutralizing force to that, to the power of centralized institutions?
So you think X, formerly known as Twitter, is a kind of neutralizing force to that, to the power of centralized institutions?
Bill Ackman
100%. And I think it’s a really important one, and it’s really been eye-opening for me to see how stories get covered in mainstream media. And then what I do on X is I follow people on multiple sides of an issue and you can or I post on a topic and I get to hear the other side. I read the replies. And the truth is something that people have had a lot of question about, particularly in the last, I would say five years beginning with Trump’s talking about fake news. And a lot of what Trump said about fake news is true. A big part of the world hated Trump and did everything they could to discredit him, destroy him.
100%. And I think it’s a really important one, and it’s really been eye-opening for me to see how stories get covered in mainstream media. And then what I do on X is I follow people on multiple sides of an issue and you can or I post on a topic and I get to hear the other side. I read the replies. And the truth is something that people have had a lot of question about, particularly in the last, I would say five years beginning with Trump’s talking about fake news. And a lot of what Trump said about fake news is true. A big part of the world hated Trump and did everything they could to discredit him, destroy him.
And he did a lot of things perhaps deserving of being discredited. He is by a very imperfect and some cases harmful leader. But everything from pre-election, the Hunter Biden laptop story in the New York Post that then Twitter made difficult for people to share and to read. COVID, the Jay Bhattacharyas of the world, questioning the government’s response, questioning long-term lockdowns, questioning keeping kids out of school, questions about masks, about vaccines, which are still not definitively answered, no counterbalance to the power of the government when the government can shut down avenues for free speech and where the mainstream media has kind of towed the line in many stents to the government’s actions.
So having an independently owned powerful platform is very important for truth, for free speech, for hearing the other side of the story, for counterbalancing the power of the government. Elon is getting a lot of pushback. The SpaceXs and Teslas of the world are experiencing a lot of government questions and investigations. And even the President of the United States came out and said, “Look, he needs to be investigated.” I’m getting my own version of that in terms of some negative media articles. I don’t know what’s next. But yeah, if you stick your neck out in today’s world and you go against the establishment, or at least the existing administration, you can find yourself in a very challenged place. And that discourages people from sharing stuff. And that’s why anonymous speech is important, some of which you find on Twitter.
Trump
Lex Fridman
You mentioned Trump. I have to talk to you about politics.
You mentioned Trump. I have to talk to you about politics.
Bill Ackman
Sure.
Sure.
Lex Fridman
Amongst all the other battles, you’ve also been a part of that one. Maybe you can correct me on this, but you’ve been a big supporter of various democratic candidates over the years, but you did say a lot of nice things about Donald Trump in 2016, I believe.
Amongst all the other battles, you’ve also been a part of that one. Maybe you can correct me on this, but you’ve been a big supporter of various democratic candidates over the years, but you did say a lot of nice things about Donald Trump in 2016, I believe.
Bill Ackman
So I was interviewed by Andrew Sorkin a week after Trump won the election.
So I was interviewed by Andrew Sorkin a week after Trump won the election.
Lex Fridman
Yes.
Yes.
Bill Ackman
And I made my case for why I thought he could be a good president.
And I made my case for why I thought he could be a good president.
Lex Fridman
Yes. So what was the case back then? To which degree did that turn out to be true? And to which degree did not? To which degree was he a good president? To which degree was he not a good president?
Yes. So what was the case back then? To which degree did that turn out to be true? And to which degree did not? To which degree was he a good president? To which degree was he not a good president?
Bill Ackman
Look, I think what I said at the time was the United States is actually a huge business. And it reminds me a bit of the type of activist investments we’ve taken on over time where this really, really great business has kind of lost its way. And with the right leadership, we can fix it. And if you think about the business of the United States today, right? You’ve got $32 trillion worth of debt over leveraged and or it’s highly leveraged, and the leverage is only increasing. We’re losing money, i.e., revenues aren’t covering expenses. The cost of our debt is going up as interest rates have gone up and the debt has to be rolled over. We have enormous administrative bloat in the country. The regulatory regime is incredibly complicated and burdensome and impeding growth. Our relations with our competitor nations and our friendly nations are far from ideal.
Look, I think what I said at the time was the United States is actually a huge business. And it reminds me a bit of the type of activist investments we’ve taken on over time where this really, really great business has kind of lost its way. And with the right leadership, we can fix it. And if you think about the business of the United States today, right? You’ve got $32 trillion worth of debt over leveraged and or it’s highly leveraged, and the leverage is only increasing. We’re losing money, i.e., revenues aren’t covering expenses. The cost of our debt is going up as interest rates have gone up and the debt has to be rolled over. We have enormous administrative bloat in the country. The regulatory regime is incredibly complicated and burdensome and impeding growth. Our relations with our competitor nations and our friendly nations are far from ideal.
And those conditions were present in 2020 as well. They’re just, I would say worse now. And I said, “Look, it’s a great thing that we have a business man as president.” And in my lifetime was really the first businessman as opposed to, I mean, maybe Bush to some degree was a business person, but I thought, “Okay, I always wanted the CEO to be CEO of America.” And now we have Trump said, “Look, he’s got some personal qualities that seem less ideal, but he’s going to be President of the United States. He’s going to rise to the occasion. This is going to be his legacy, and he knows how to make deals and he’s going to recruit some great people into his administration.” I hoped. And growth can solve a lot of our problems. So if we can get rid of a bunch of regulations that are holding back the country, we can have a president.
Obama was a, I would say not a pro-business president. He did not love the business community. He did not love successful people. And having a president who just changed the tone on being a pro-business president, I thought it would be good for the country. And that’s basically what I said. And I would say Trump did a lot of good things and a lot of people, you can get criticized for acknowledging that, but I think the country’s economy accelerated dramatically. And that, by the way, the capitalist system helps the people at the bottom best when the system does well and when the economy does well.
The black unemployment rate was the lowest in history when Trump was president, and that’s true for other minority groups. So he was good for the economy, and he recognized some of the challenges and issues and threats of China early. He kind of woke up NATO. Now, again, the way he did all this stuff you can object to, but NATO actually started spending more money on defense in the early part of Trump’s presidency because of his threats, which turned out to be a good thing in light of ultimately the Russia-Ukraine war. And I think if you analyze Trump objectively based on policies, he did a lot of good for the country. I think what’s bad is he did some harm as well.
I do think civility disappeared in America with Trump as president. A lot of that’s his personal style. And how important is civility? I do think he was attacked very aggressively by the left, by the media that made him paranoid. It probably interfered with his ability to be successful. He had the Russian collusion investigation overhang, and when someone’s attacked, they’re not going to be at their best, particularly if they’re paranoid. I think there’s some degree of that, but I’m giving the best of defense of Trump. Just you look at how he managed his team, right? Very few people made it through the Trump administration without getting fired or quitting, and he would say they’re the greatest person in the world when he hired them, and they’re total disaster when he fired them. It’s not an inspiring way to be a leader and to attract really talented people.
I think the events surrounding the election, I think January 6th, he could have done a lot more to stop a riot. I don’t consider it an insurrection, but a riot that takes place in our capitol. And where police officers are killed or die, commit suicide for failure as they sought it to do their job. He stepped in way too late to stop that. He could have stopped it early. Many of his words, I think, inspired people, some of whom with malintent to go in there and cause harm, and literally to shut down the government. There were some evil people unfortunately there. So he’s been a very imperfect president and also I think contributed to the extreme amount of divisiveness in our country. So I was ultimately disappointed by the note of optimism. And again, I always support the president. I trust the people ultimately to select our next leader.
It’s a bit like who wants to be a millionaire? When you go to the crowd and the crowd says a certain thing, you got to trust the crowd. But usually in who wants to be a millionaire, it’s a landslide in one direction. So you know which letter to pick. Here, we had an incredibly close election, which itself is a problem. So my dream and what I’ve tried a little bit, played politics in the last little period to support some alternatives to Trump so that we have a president. I use the example, imagine you woke up in the morning, it’s election day, whatever it is, this November 4th, whatever, 2024, and you still haven’t figured out who to vote for because the candidates are so appealing that you don’t know which lever to pull because it’s a tough call. That’s the choice we should be making as Americans. It shouldn’t be, I’m a member of this party and I’m only going to vote this way. I’m a member of that party going to vote the other way and I hate the other side. And that’s where we’ve been, unfortunately for too long.
Lex Fridman
Or you might be torn because both candidates are not good.
Or you might be torn because both candidates are not good.
Bill Ackman
Yeah.
Yeah.
Lex Fridman
I love a future where I’m torn because the choices are so amazing.
I love a future where I’m torn because the choices are so amazing.
Bill Ackman
The problem is the party system is so screwed up and the parties are self-interested, and there’s another governance problem, an incentive problem. Michael Porter, who was one of my professors at Harvard Business School, wrote a brilliant piece on the American political system and all the incentives and market dynamics and what he called a competitive analysis. It’s a must read. I should dig it up and send it around on X, but it explains how the parties and the incentives of these sort of self-sustaining entities where the people involved are not incentivized to do what’s best for the country, it’s a problem.
The problem is the party system is so screwed up and the parties are self-interested, and there’s another governance problem, an incentive problem. Michael Porter, who was one of my professors at Harvard Business School, wrote a brilliant piece on the American political system and all the incentives and market dynamics and what he called a competitive analysis. It’s a must read. I should dig it up and send it around on X, but it explains how the parties and the incentives of these sort of self-sustaining entities where the people involved are not incentivized to do what’s best for the country, it’s a problem.
Dean Phillips
Lex Fridman
You’ve been a supporter of Dean Phillips for the 2024 US presidential race.
You’ve been a supporter of Dean Phillips for the 2024 US presidential race.
Bill Ackman
Yes.
Yes.
Lex Fridman
What do you like about Dean?
What do you like about Dean?
Bill Ackman
I think he’s a honest, smart, motivated, capable, proven guy as a business leader. And I think in six, almost in his three terms in Congress, he ran when Trump was elected, he said his kids cried, his daughters cried, inspired him to run for office, ran in a Republican district in Minnesota for the last 60 years, was elected in the landslide, has been re-elected twice, moved up the ranks in the Congress, respected by his fellow members of Congress, advance some important legislation during COVID on senior roles, on various foreign policy committees. Centrist considered, I think the second most bipartisan member of the Congress. I’d love to have a bipartisan president. That’s the only way to go forward. But we’d enormously benefit if we had a president that chose policies on the basis of what’s best for the country as opposed to what his party wanted. What I like about him is he’s financially independent.
I think he’s a honest, smart, motivated, capable, proven guy as a business leader. And I think in six, almost in his three terms in Congress, he ran when Trump was elected, he said his kids cried, his daughters cried, inspired him to run for office, ran in a Republican district in Minnesota for the last 60 years, was elected in the landslide, has been re-elected twice, moved up the ranks in the Congress, respected by his fellow members of Congress, advance some important legislation during COVID on senior roles, on various foreign policy committees. Centrist considered, I think the second most bipartisan member of the Congress. I’d love to have a bipartisan president. That’s the only way to go forward. But we’d enormously benefit if we had a president that chose policies on the basis of what’s best for the country as opposed to what his party wanted. What I like about him is he’s financially independent.
He’s not a billionaire, but he doesn’t need the job. The party hates him now because he challenged the king, but he was willing to give up his political career because what he thought was best for the country, he tried to get other people to run who were higher profile, had more name recognition. None would, no one wants to challenge Biden if they want to have a chance to stay in office or run in the future. But he’s very principled. I think he would be a great president, but his shot is Michigan, but he needs to raise money in order to… He’s only got a couple weeks and he’s got to be on TV there. That’s expensive. So we’ll see.
Lex Fridman
So he has to increase name recognition, all that kind of stuff. Also, as you mentioned, he’s young.
So he has to increase name recognition, all that kind of stuff. Also, as you mentioned, he’s young.
Bill Ackman
55. Yeah, but he’s a young 55. You see him play hockey.
55. Yeah, but he’s a young 55. You see him play hockey.
Lex Fridman
Yeah. I mean, I guess 55 no matter what is a pretty young age.
Yeah. I mean, I guess 55 no matter what is a pretty young age.
Bill Ackman
I’m 57. I feel young. I can do more pull-ups today than I could as a kid. So that’s a standard.
I’m 57. I feel young. I can do more pull-ups today than I could as a kid. So that’s a standard.
Lex Fridman
You’re at the top of your tennis game.
You’re at the top of your tennis game.
Bill Ackman
I’m at the top of my tennis game for sure.
I’m at the top of my tennis game for sure.
Lex Fridman
Maybe there’s someone that would disagree with that.
Maybe there’s someone that would disagree with that.
Bill Ackman
And by the way, the other thing to point out here is, and I have been pointing this out as of others, Biden is I think is done. I mean, it’s embarrassing. It’s embarrassing for the country having him as a presidential candidate, let alone the president of the country. It’s crazy. And it’s just going to get worse and worse and should… The worst of his legacy is his ego that prevents him from stepping aside. And that’s it. It’s his ego. And it is so wrong and so bad and so embarrassing when you talk to people. I was in Europe, I was in London a few days ago, and people are like, “Bill, how can this guy be a president?” And it’s a bit like, again, I go back to my business analogy. Being a CEO is like a full contact sport. Being President of the United States is like some combination of wrestling, marathon running, being a triathlete.
And by the way, the other thing to point out here is, and I have been pointing this out as of others, Biden is I think is done. I mean, it’s embarrassing. It’s embarrassing for the country having him as a presidential candidate, let alone the president of the country. It’s crazy. And it’s just going to get worse and worse and should… The worst of his legacy is his ego that prevents him from stepping aside. And that’s it. It’s his ego. And it is so wrong and so bad and so embarrassing when you talk to people. I was in Europe, I was in London a few days ago, and people are like, “Bill, how can this guy be a president?” And it’s a bit like, again, I go back to my business analogy. Being a CEO is like a full contact sport. Being President of the United States is like some combination of wrestling, marathon running, being a triathlete.
I mean, you got to be at the serious physical shape and at the top of your game to represent this country. And he is a far cry from that. And it’s just getting worse, and it’s embarrassing. And he cannot be. And by the way, every day he waits, he’s handing the election to Trump because it’s harder and harder for an alternative candidate to surface. Now, Dean is the only candidate left on the Democratic side. They can still win delegates. He’s on the ballot in 42 states. And the best way for Biden to step aside is for Dean to show well in Michigan.
Lex Fridman
And so you think there is a path with the delegates and all that kind of stuff?
And so you think there is a path with the delegates and all that kind of stuff?
Bill Ackman
100%. So what has to happen is New Hampshire, he went from 0 to 20% of the vote and 10 weeks with no name recognition. I helped a little bit. Elon helped. We did a spaces for him. We had 350,000 people on the spaces. Some originally 40,000 live or something and then the rest after. And then he was on the ground in New Hampshire. And New Hampshire is one of the states where you don’t need to be registered to a party to vote for the candidate. So it’s like jump ball and you got 20%. And that’s with a lot of independents and Democrats voting for Haley.
100%. So what has to happen is New Hampshire, he went from 0 to 20% of the vote and 10 weeks with no name recognition. I helped a little bit. Elon helped. We did a spaces for him. We had 350,000 people on the spaces. Some originally 40,000 live or something and then the rest after. And then he was on the ground in New Hampshire. And New Hampshire is one of the states where you don’t need to be registered to a party to vote for the candidate. So it’s like jump ball and you got 20%. And that’s with a lot of independents and Democrats voting for Haley.
Haley, who I like and who I’ve supported, does not look like she’s going to make it. Trump is really kind of running the table. And so vote for Haley as an independent Michigan, maybe throw away your vote. I think it increases the likelihood that Dean can get those independent votes if he could theoretically, again, he needs money, he could beat Biden in Michigan. Biden’s doing very poorly in Michigan. His polls are terrible. The Muslim community is not happy with him, and he really has spent no time there. And so if he’s embarrassed in Michigan, it could be a catalyst for him withdrawing.
Then Dean will get funding if he wins Michigan or shows well in Michigan, and people say he’s viable. He’s the only choice we have. He’ll attract from the center, he’ll attract from people, Republicans who won’t vote for Trump, of which there are a big percentage, could be 60% or more. It could be 70% won’t vote for Trump and also from the Democrats. So I think he’s a really interesting candidate, but we’ve got to get the word out.
Lex Fridman
I gotten a chance to chat with Dean. I really like him. I really like him. And I think the next President of the United States is going to have to meet and speak regularly with Zelensky, Putin, [inaudible 03:25:07], with world leaders and have some of the most historic conversations, agreements, negotiations. And I just don’t see Biden doing that.
I gotten a chance to chat with Dean. I really like him. I really like him. And I think the next President of the United States is going to have to meet and speak regularly with Zelensky, Putin, [inaudible 03:25:07], with world leaders and have some of the most historic conversations, agreements, negotiations. And I just don’t see Biden doing that.
Bill Ackman
No.
No.
Lex Fridman
And not for any reason, but sadly, age.
And not for any reason, but sadly, age.
Bill Ackman
Think about it this way. When Biden’s present now, you saw his recent impromptu press conference, which he did after the special prosecutor report, basically saying the guy was way past his prime, and then he confused the president of Mexico and the president of Egypt. So they’re very careful when they roll him out and he’s scripted and he’s always reading from a lectern. Imagine the care they have in exposing him, and when they expose him, it’s terrible. Okay. Imagine how bad it is for real.
Think about it this way. When Biden’s present now, you saw his recent impromptu press conference, which he did after the special prosecutor report, basically saying the guy was way past his prime, and then he confused the president of Mexico and the president of Egypt. So they’re very careful when they roll him out and he’s scripted and he’s always reading from a lectern. Imagine the care they have in exposing him, and when they expose him, it’s terrible. Okay. Imagine how bad it is for real.
Lex Fridman
It’s not good.
It’s not good.
Bill Ackman
No, really bad for America. And I’m upset with him and upset with his family. I’m upset with his wife. This is the time where the people closest to you have to put their arms around you and say, “Dad, honey, you’ve done your thing. This is going to be your legacy and it’s not going to be a good one.”
No, really bad for America. And I’m upset with him and upset with his family. I’m upset with his wife. This is the time where the people closest to you have to put their arms around you and say, “Dad, honey, you’ve done your thing. This is going to be your legacy and it’s not going to be a good one.”
Lex Fridman
Great leaders should also know when to step down.
Great leaders should also know when to step down.
Bill Ackman
Yeah. One of the best tests of a leader is succession planning. This is a massive failure of succession planning.
Yeah. One of the best tests of a leader is succession planning. This is a massive failure of succession planning.
Future
Lex Fridman
Outside of politics, let me look to the future, first, in terms of the financial world, what are you looking forward to in the next couple of years? You have a new fund. What are you thinking about in terms of investment, your own and the entire economy, and maybe even the economy of the world?
Outside of politics, let me look to the future, first, in terms of the financial world, what are you looking forward to in the next couple of years? You have a new fund. What are you thinking about in terms of investment, your own and the entire economy, and maybe even the economy of the world?
Bill Ackman
Sure. So the SEC doesn’t like us to talk about new funds that we’re launching, that we filed with the SEC.
Sure. So the SEC doesn’t like us to talk about new funds that we’re launching, that we filed with the SEC.
Lex Fridman
Sure.
Sure.
Bill Ackman
But I would say I do, and by the way, if anyone’s ever interested in a fund, they should always read the prospectus carefully, including the risk factors. That’s very, very important. But I like the idea of democratizing access to good investors, and I think that’s an interesting trend. So we want to be part of that trend. In terms of financial markets, generally the economy, a lot is going to depend upon the next leader of the country. So we’re kind of right back there. The leadership of the United States is important for the US economy. It’s important for the global economy, it’s important for global peace, and we’ve gone through a really difficult period, and it’s time. We need a break. But look, I think the United States is an incredibly resilient country.
But I would say I do, and by the way, if anyone’s ever interested in a fund, they should always read the prospectus carefully, including the risk factors. That’s very, very important. But I like the idea of democratizing access to good investors, and I think that’s an interesting trend. So we want to be part of that trend. In terms of financial markets, generally the economy, a lot is going to depend upon the next leader of the country. So we’re kind of right back there. The leadership of the United States is important for the US economy. It’s important for the global economy, it’s important for global peace, and we’ve gone through a really difficult period, and it’s time. We need a break. But look, I think the United States is an incredibly resilient country.
We have some incredible moats among them. We have the Atlantic and the Pacific, and we have peaceful neighbors to the north and the South. We’re an enormously rich country. Capitalism still works effectively here. I get optimistic about the world when I talk to my friends who are either venture capitalists or my hobby of backing these young entrepreneurs. I talked to a founder of a startup, if you want to get optimistic about the world. So I think technology is going to save us. I think AI, of course, has its frightening, Terminator-like scenarios. But I’m going to take the opposite view that this is going to be a huge enabler of productivity, scientific discovery, drug discovery, and it’s going to make us healthier, happier, and better. So I do think the internet revolution had a lot of good, obviously some bad. I think the AI revolution’s going to be similar, but we’re at this other really interesting juncture in the world with technology, and we’re going to have to use it for our good.
On the media front, I’m happy about X, and I think Elon’s going to be successful here. I think advertisers will realize it’s a really good platform. The best way to reach me, if you want to sell something to me, I’ve actually bought stuff on some ads in X. I don’t remember the last time I responded to a direct response advertising. In terms of my business, I have an incredible team. It’s tiny. We’re one of the smallest firms relative to the assets we manage. It’s a bit like the Navy SEALs, not the US Army. We have only 40 people at Pershing Square. So it’s a tight team. I think we’ll do great things. I think we’re early on my ambitions investment-wise, I’ve always said I’d like to have a record as good as Warren Buffett’s. The problem is, each year he adds on another year.
He’s now in his 93rd year. So I’ve got 36 more years to just get where he is, and I think he’s going to add a lot more years. I’m excited about seeing what Neri is going to produce. She’s building an incredible company. They’re trying to solve a lot of problems with respect to products and buildings and their impact on the environment. Her vision is how do we design products that by virtue of the product’s existence, the world is a better place. Today, her world is a world where the existence of the new car actually is better for the environment than if the new car hadn’t existed. And think about that in every product scale, that’s what she’s working on. I don’t want to give away too much, but you’re going to see some early examples of what she’s working on. So again, I get excited about the future and crises are sort of a terrible thing to waste.
And we’ve had a number of these here. I think this disaster in the Middle East, my prediction is the next few months, this war will largely be over in terms of getting rid of Hamas. I think I can envision a world in which Saudi Arabia, some of the other Gulf states come together, take over the governance and reconstruction of Gaza. Security guarantees are put in place. The Abraham Accords continue to grow. A deal is made. Terrorists are ostracized that this October 7th experience on the Harvard, Penn, MIT, Columbia, unfortunately, other campuses is a wake-up call for universities. Generally, people see the problems with DEI, but understand the importance of diversity and inclusion, but not as a political movement, but as a way that we return to a meritocratic world where someone’s background is relevant in understanding their contribution, but we don’t have race quotas and things that were made illegal years ago actually being implemented in organizations on campus. So I think there’s, if we can go through a corrective phase, and I’m an optimist and I hope we get there.
Lex Fridman
So you have hope for the entirety of it, even for Harvard.
So you have hope for the entirety of it, even for Harvard.
Bill Ackman
I have hope, even for Harvard, it’s generally hard to break 400 year old things.
I have hope, even for Harvard, it’s generally hard to break 400 year old things.
Lex Fridman
Well, I share your hope and you are a fascinating mind, a brilliant mind, persistent as you like to say. And fearless, the fearless part is truly inspiring, and this was an incredible conversation. Thank you. Thank you for talking today, Bill.
Well, I share your hope and you are a fascinating mind, a brilliant mind, persistent as you like to say. And fearless, the fearless part is truly inspiring, and this was an incredible conversation. Thank you. Thank you for talking today, Bill.
Bill Ackman
Thank you, Lex.
Thank you, Lex.
Lex Fridman
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Bill Ackman. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you some words from Jonathan Swift, “A wise person should have money in their head, but not in their heart.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Bill Ackman. To support this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you some words from Jonathan Swift, “A wise person should have money in their head, but not in their heart.” Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.