Adam Serwer: The Cruelty is the Point

become a sustaining member of the commonwealth  club for just ten dollars a month join today well hello everybody and welcome to tonight's  virtual commonwealth club program obviously we   wish we could be with you in person but  i am thrilled to be with you tonight my   name is erin haynes i'm editor-at-large  for the 19th and also a founding mother   the 19th is a non-profit independent newsroom  that is focused on the intersection of gender   politics and policy as the club continues to host  virtual events uh they are also grateful for the   continued support of their members and donors you  can visit commonwealthclub.org to learn more about   membership or you can support the club right now  with a tax deductible gift by clicking the blue   donate button that's on your screen and now it is  my pleasure to introduce adam serwer staff writer   at the atlantic and author of the cruelty is  the point the past present and future of trump's   america adam is an award-winning journalist and  his new book chronicles the trump administration   exploring a number of issues including white  nationalism and the devastating impact that   fear and exclusion has had on our democracy  so is just a reminder we're going to take   your questions so please please please submit  those in the chat and with that adam welcome   uh thank you thank you so  much for uh doing this erin   you are very very welcome i want to get right  into our conversation and and i think probably   a good place to start is is something that you and  i have talked about a lot uh for those of you uh   tuning in i will tell you that adam and i are  friends and we have talked a lot about uh the   cruelty is the point and and a lot of the work  that uh ended up in this book kind of along the   way and and you were uh i was surprised to  learn reading this book that you were among   the political press that was kind of initially  skeptical about um president trump's chances   i wonder if you can talk a little bit about  the moment that you realized or that you   became convinced that that uh donald trump could  actually become president of the united states   um so i'm not sure that there was a particular  moment where um i i became convinced i always   under i mean i understood it as a possibility  certainly when he started winning um the actual   formal nominations contest uh that was a  line that was crossed that was distinct from   you know what had until that point then i think  some people had tweeted it like it was sort of   a sideshow to the actual election or that he  was going to implode which was a pattern that   would repeat itself obviously throughout the  administration this belief that um donald trump   had finally crossed the line that would um you  know divest him from his supporters um and that but even though i wasn't sure that  he was really going to win and you   know the polling suggested that he would  not um even until the end although he you   know it's his chances were better than um  people most people acknowledged at the time   um it was clear to me that he was manipulating  some of the most treacherous forces in america in   american history um and he was doing so without  regard for the damage that that might cause   and that to me was already interesting because  it said that there was political strength   in wielding those forces um against some of  the most vulnerable people in the country   um and that you know that was going to have an  impact no matter what so i immediately began   i'm sort of reading about the history of american  nativism american immigration politics um you know   in particular the history of reconstruction which  i think is really um a sort of uh seminal struggle   in american history just it's the first time that  america attempts to become a full uh multi-racial   democracy and it fails and the reasons why it  fails are also the reasons why it's failed um   ever since or while i've struggled ever since uh  to meet those ideals um so even though i was never   you know certain you know i wasn't one of those  people who had sort of you know a certainty that   he would win um enough people that i knew um  who were astute observers of american politics   did think he would win or didn't think  he had a chance as i write in the book   um and so that that that was enough for me to  take it seriously from the beginning yeah and   and i think too i mean you and i are journalists  that that uh believe in the value of history   as uh you know the foundation the context for uh  you know a lot of uh the work that we do and so   you realized that as part of your  reporting kind of along the way   uh to covering that campaign to covering this  administration was really a robust and working   knowledge of the history of this country of  the history of american politics talk about um   whether that was something that you had an  appreciation for even before you came to this   you know to covering and and writing about this  administration and if that's something that you   feel like you have come to rely on even more  in the past uh five years i guess i would say   so i i would say that um the sort of style that uh  i have brought to my work began really in ferguson   um and i think a lot of this reevaluation of  american history begins in ferguson because   ferguson i think is a seminal moment in the  obama administration when a lot of americans   really begin asking themselves how is it that  american life is still so defined by a race   uh when we have a black president um how could  this paradox exist and so people start looking   back at history to try and um understand  you know things like the the the massacre   in charleston um the rise of donald trump sort of  accelerated this process um but i think you know   even earlier than that when i was working at  mother jones uh my editor there david corn he   said to me you know the news is what people have  forgotten it's not just what people uh don't   know yet and i think that's important because um  you know in journalism there's an is an obvious   ideological reason to uh privilege new knowledge  over uh past knowledge but sometimes readers   don't have the full context for why something  is happening and sometimes reporters especially   if you're on a beat you've been covering  something for a long time you can uh you can miss uh you can have contextual  information that you don't think you   need to communicate to a reader that in fact  would illuminate the issue for them greatly   um and so for me uh you know just sort of looking  into history to find the origin of struggles that   we're dealing with in the present day has been my  way of illuminating for readers something um that   they might not quite understand um in part because  the of the nature of journalism itself which is   very forward-looking yeah yeah and and in contrast  to uh you know our society our democracy which   tends to be cyclical right and so uh that's that's  a really good point that you're making i i have to   uh for for folks who are tuning in here i have to  read the section because i thought that that stood   out to me uh the the quote that you mentioned  from uh from david corn our friend um so i'll just   read this a little passage from this if you will  indulge me for a second reporters are often taught   that journalism is the first draft of history but  american journalism is afflicted by a presentism   a kind of goldfish memory that struggles to think  outside the present or recent past that makes a   certain amount of sense the old chestnut is that  the news is what is new but an old editor of mine   david corn of mother jones used to say that  the news is also what people have forgotten   the reactions to trump whether the  enthusiasm or apprehension on the right   or the disbelief on the left showed  that americans had forgotten quite a bit   and i have spent the last five years trying to  help people remember so yeah we talk about kind   of how journalism is forward-looking what is  it that the american people forgot uh in the   2016 election and maybe even uh you know you  know 70 million people uh forgot again in 2020   i think that uh there is a kind of um you know i  refer to this in the book as accidents of liberal   optimism and conservative sentimentality and and  by that i simply mean um you know when barack   obama says the arc of history bends towards  justice that's a very compelling image but   it's not really how history works in practice a  lot of times it's one step forward two steps back   or two steps forward one step back um and you know  when you look at someone like donald trump he is   operating from a very idealized version of history  you know when he says make america great again   that raises a question of what when was america  great and what period are you talking about um and   so right and for whom um and when you see things  like the 1776 project which was you know like   an official state history as retort to the  new york times 1619 project that is not about   uh exploring history that is about putting  forth an official historical narrative   that sentimentalizes these aspects of american  history that uh conservatives would rather   marginalize or not see for what they are um and  i think you know to a certain extent um you know   the sort of traditional liberal narrative for  political reasons emphasizes american progress um   and sometimes uh the narrative is not as neat as  presented um because politically it does not make   sense to talk about uh the warts in that narrative  uh or the way in which it might not be accurate um   and so you know and i understand that politicians  you know their job is to get elected it's not to   tell the truth that's our job um so you know  when they say things that aren't true it's our   job to point out the ways in which they are not  true um and and for me you know there's there's   two sides of this american story about us always  moving forward which is you know one denies um   one assumes that we are constantly moving  forward and the other denies that we had   anything to overcome at all um and and i think  that both of those really do a disservice   uh to americans understanding their own country  yeah yeah i mean you you talk in the book about   um uh those who lack the knowledge to separate  history from sentiment i mean i'm based in   philadelphia where probably our most powerful  and potent origin stories uh you know are can   be found uh you know about again from our  founding documents to the founding fathers   you name it um you know and these these  are um you know there certainly is truth   in those but but uh a truth that people  would rather gravitate to as opposed to   those exactly some of those realities that that uh  you point out that are you know uncomfortable uh   for some folks at at the very least uh and you  know and and wanting to kind of relegate those   more uncomfortable ugly parts of our our country  to uh past behavior as opposed to um you know a   legacy that is living and breathing and still  very much with us and very much impacting uh many   people many millions of people in this country um  i i think there's a reason for that i mean i think   i'm sorry i was just gonna say this conversation  about the past has political salience i mean i i   don't think it's coincidence that you're  looking in some in some of these states   conservative legislatures trying to restrict the  teaching of certain aspects of american history   having to do with race because if you um if you  look at american history and you determine that   uh a present day racial disparities are in large  part the um product of american public policy   uh that you know it doesn't inherently but it  makes a strong case for state intervention to   rectify those disparities um and if you don't  want the state to intervene then you want to   find some way of arguing that uh those disparities  are the results of inherent differences in talent   or ability or culture or haven't have nothing to  do with um uh actions of the state that must be   rectified um and to a large extent i  think that is what this argument over   history that we're having is really about  yeah yeah i agree and and i feel like that that should have been one of the lessons that we  have learned in the past four years and yet um you   know the way that uh frankly i think a lot of the  coverage um is is happening does not necessarily   reflect that we have have learned that lesson i  mean i i think um you know one of the things that   i'd love to ask uh political journalists that  i know and i will ask it to you now is either   why do you think the trump law i mean trump won  in 2016 or why do you think that hillary lost and   uh you know one of the answers that people love to  give uh you mentioned in the book economic anxiety   right was uh the reason that that trump was  elected in in 2016 uh but um you know if if   people do not give answers that have something  to do with either race or gender like within   their first three inches i'm always skeptical  about whether they actually understand the   dynamics of this country the dynamics of that  election the dynamics of this past election   i think it's really important to distinguish  between a legitimate grievance and a legitimate   means of addressing that grievance um so you  know the obama stimulus was too small uh we   know that now um the the obama administration did  not do a good job of keeping people in their homes   um a substantial amount particularly of  black and latino wealth was wiped out as   a result of the housing crisis but a  lot of white people were here too but   the distinction is that the overwhelming  majority of those black and latino voters were   negatively impacted by the recession  and the obama administration's   failure to address it more aggressively um did  not they were largely immune to trump's appeals   um and so we have to ask a question about you know  it's not simply enough to say economic hardship   makes you react a certain way what makes you react  a certain way is the ideological lens through   which you experience your personal hardship and  that you know it's not simply enough to say uh you   know if you have a miss if you if you experience  some misfortune you you are automatically you   know the the the you're automatically going  to find appealing a candidate who advertises   his willingness to use state violence against  uh uh religious and ethnic minorities in the   united states you're automatically going to find  that appealing um that there's really there's a   missing step there um that for you know for a lot  of reasons commercial ideological uh social uh you   know i think in 2016 a lot of reporters were  low to admit but i think trump over the past   you know four years of his administration uh made  it very difficult to avoid the conclusions that   most of us are you know many of us had drawn in  2015. yeah um and a lot of what you were able to   glean what got you kind of uh you know the  reality that um that donald trump was going   to become president was some of what you saw on  the campaign trail right and you talked so much   in the book about uh not just the president but  his supporters right um so i'm wondering if you   uh will indulge us here and and uh read a little  bit from the book i'm thinking about page 42. if you could read page 42 i think that this this sets us  up for the next part of our conversation okay   uh which part even before turn point okay even  before trump won the united states was consumed by   a debate over the nature of his appeal was racism  the driving force behind trump's candidacy if so   how could americans the vast majority of whom said  they opposed racism to back a racist candidate   during the final few weeks of the campaign i asked  dozens of trump supporters about the candidate's   remarks regarding muslims and people of color i  wanted to understand how these average republicans   those who would never read the neo-nazi website  the daily stormer or go to a clan rally at   a confederate statute had nevertheless  embraced someone who demonized religious   and ethnic minorities what i found was that trump  embodied his supporters most profound beliefs   combining an insistence that discriminatory  policies were necessary with vehement denials   that his policies would discriminate an absolute  outrage that the question would even be asked   it was not just trump supporters who were  in denial about what they were voting for   but americans across the political spectrum who  as had been the case with those who backed duke   were searching desperately for any alternative  explanation outsourcing anti-washington anger   economic anxiety to the ones staring them in the  face the frequent post-selection media expeditions   to trump country to see whether the fever is  broken or whether trump's most ardent supporters   have changed their minds or a direct outgrowth of  this state these supporters will not change their   minds because this is what they always wanted a  president who embodies the rage that they feel   towards those they hate and fear while reassuring  them that that rage is nothing to be ashamed of   yeah yeah i mean i think uh and i think that  that's exactly it i mean i think that uh you know   because president trump was somebody who was a  public figure for so long before he was president   we knew who he was i think that um you know the  surprise to too many political journalists was   kind of who the american electorate was uh and so  i think that's right yeah i mean what is it that   we missed what is it that we are still missing  about that electorate and why does that matter   um i think you know part of uh i think it's  complicated because i feel like this is a this is   trump's constituency is ideally uh geographically  distributed um to maximize his support in both   the senate and the electoral college um and the  structure of that system which allows one party   to hold power without winning a majority of the  votes trump came within a hare's breath of winning   re-election um despite winning many millions  fewer votes than joe biden um and he won in 2016   um you know despite having fewer votes than  hillary clinton and he donald trump a majority of   americans rejected donald trump in three straight  elections um and uh you know in in 2018 democrats   took the house but they did not take the senate  they uh took the senate in the white house in   2020 but they came you know very close to not  doing that um and so you know when you have a   base that is distributed that way it becomes more  urgent to persuade that base that they're on the   verge of destruction and so anything they  do to prevent that destruction is justified   and so that's how you end up with this sort of  apocalyptic rhetoric that has become a staple   of uh trump rallies where he's sort of  basically like the liberals want to destroy   everything you love joe biden is going to kill god  you know to to you know cory booker is going to um   go after the housewives and the suburbs i mean  that you know that i mean you really can't get   much more explicit than that um you know um this  kind of rhetoric is there to say you know maybe   i'm not the person the ideal person you would vote  for you know because i'm on my third marriage and   i have a lot of kids or whatever but i'm and i'm  vulgar uh but i'm the one who's standing between   you and the end of your world as you as you know  it i mean even though that's not true it's a very   potent and effective political pitch and one  of the things that kind of political pitch does   is it makes his own cruelty seem heroic  because he is merely acting in defense of   traditional americans as they understand  themselves to be um uh who and defending   their inheritance of the country uh from people  who uh you know do not deserve to be in charge   or do not deserve to hold power because they're  not truly american to begin with right um and and   that that was an effective strategy at least  for four years right um is enough to convince   uh others that this is uh a strategy  to emulate uh you know we're seeing   folks uh you know lower down the ticket that  that feel like this is a pass of success   obviously the president still holds a former  president still holds an outside influence   over um you know republican politics in this  moment and so um you know i'm wondering um   you know i know we're only six months into  a biden-harris administration but you know   a lot of folks are asking kind  of about whether um the lasting   influence of trumpism if you know voters would  sure a majority of voters ended up rejecting   this but there were you know it was it was a slim  majority that rejected it and so um yeah i mean   it was slim in the electoral college but it  was a fairly large popular vote margin i mean   you know to answer your question i think um you  know trump uh highlighted the role of cruelty   in american politics but it's a false sense of  comfort to think that that's all behind us and   a misinterpretation i think it started with  him and neither started nor ended with him   as something that goes back to the founding of  the country if you're going to say that all men   are created equal you have to find justifications  for why the people you own as chattel do not count that they do not have inna inalienable rights um  that the same the same inalienable rights that you   do um so this politics is very old it's not just  you know it it's not just about the republican   party or about conservatism it's something that  is a part of you know unfortunately embedded in   the history of american politics um but trump  mostly showed the republican party what they   could get with it and now that they know they  can get away with it i mean as i said in 2020   um you know they lost but they lost by much less  than they thought they were going to lose by   in a situation where you know a lot of people  were predicting something like a landslide for   joe biden and when that didn't happen what it  said was you know this trumpism thing can work   it might even work better without him um because  what it's really about as i said is is maximizing   um republican electoral potential within the  counter-majoritarian levers of american democracy   um and so as long as that pays off until they  pay a significant political price for it the   republican party is going to continue on the same  path um and they're going to keep doing things   like attempt to restrict the electorate from  the participation of democratic constituencies   um so that they can hold power without  having to worry about what those people think   yeah that was exactly where i was  driving next so thank you for uh   that segway because yeah i mean so you mentioned  you know politicians are you know here to get   elected they are not here to tell us the truth um  and obviously we are still living with the big lie   even though it did not work for president trump in  terms of getting him a second term um it continues   to be very effective uh in our politics especially  you know at the state level with what we're seeing   uh in these state legislatures wanting to address  the threat of election integrity which we know   is not real and not a threat um and so uh you talk  in the book about um trump's understanding of the   rigged system and how that is different from  our understanding of what the rigged system is   um you know i i guess you know for people you know  people who are working on behalf of voting rights   you know frame this is as existential you know as  as a threat to our democracy and everything else   that comes along with it but i mean um i wonder if  you agree i mean that the big lie that this idea   the rig system is dangerous um and and also kind  of what the stakes are of of misinformation i mean   yes people are literally dying over misinformation  of vaccines but um yeah mr misinformation is is is   literally a potential issue so so i think there's  two things that um you know i i try to distinguish   in the book between the rigged system that  bernie sanders talks about which is from his view   an economic system that redistributes income  upwards and denies the great mass of the american   people um the uh the ability to uh participate  or have access to american economic prosperity   which is instead ordered by the people who are  in the top 1 to 30 of the income bracket that is   distinct from donald trump's version of a rigged  system which is one in which the unworthy um are   elevated over the worthy um and you can tell  who donald trump thinks is unworthy because   he talks about them all the time and and how  scared they are and how they're destroying   everything he you and he love about america um  but i think you know when you look back when you   look at these law it's not clear to me that these  laws will be successful it's clear that they are   intended to restrict the participation of  democratic constituencies um in politics   so that republicans can be insulated from um  you know doing things that they don't like   so if you're a politician and you only have to  worry about the most conservative segment of   the electorate it doesn't really matter  how much liberals they're howling about   um you know what you're doing if you have  them packed into districts where they can't   elect another representative or you know you're  in a rural state uh where uh no matter what you do   you're going to get reelected um and so uh  you know i think we have to remember that   american you know american unfreedom always  presents itself as a defensive democracy   the confederacy presented itself as preserving  the original constitution as is understood by the   founders the democratic redeemers who overthrew  the reconstruction governments saw themselves as   purifying the ballot as uh protecting american  democracy from the illegitimate participation   of black men um and i think you can hear something  similar in this rhetoric now when they talk about   uh you know in some cases in more trumpy  corners of the internet um and another   conservative intellectual world they talk  about people who are not really american   um in parts of the less trumpy internet you  can talk you can hear them talk about how uh   it's good to restrict the electorate because the  ignorant shouldn't be participating in any way   um and that's a little more of a dog whistle but  we still know what that means um and then there's   trump who says things like you know philadelphia  and detroit should not be allowed to decide a   presidential election and that is 100 clear uh  despite the fact that trump did better in detroit   in philadelphia in 2020 than 2016 him and his  base consider those places the political power   the black political power that emanates from  those spaces is fundamentally illegitimate and   see its restriction not as um marring democracy  as most voting rights advocates do because   it you know it attacks political equality uh but  defending democracy because certain people uh you   know because the country belongs to trump's base  legitimately and uh you know anything other than   uh their political victory is a usurpation um and  so you know that's a very dangerous place to be   and fundamentally when we look at american history  the only way that parties change is if they are   forced to uh their means of power changes so you  look at an organization like the democratic party   which was you know in the 1930s the most powerful  white supremacist organization in american life because of the entry of black voters  because of this coalition of black voters   labor unions urban liberals they fundamentally  changed this party that had been presiding over   a jim crow state in the american south uh in which  black people were not allowed to participate into   a party of civil rights so what that says to me is  that as long as the republican party does not have   to reach outside of its constituency to hold power  uh it will continue on this path um and and that   and and changing those incentives really requires  altering the system so that it's more equal so   that means admitting new states it means maybe  multi-member districts it means protecting voting   rights at the federal level so that states cannot  pick and choose their electorates so that they are   no longer responsive to the people i mean that's  the fundamental function of democracy is to have   a representative democracy is that representatives  care about what their constituents think um and so   they act in their interests now when you when  politicians no longer have to worry about what   their constituents think they no longer have to  respect their rights or their desires and that's   short circuits the entire feedback process that  is necessary for democracy to function um so i   think we're in a dangerous place i don't know  that it's necessarily true that the republicans   can devices will work in part because um you  know coalitions change politics to change it's   hard to know what the future is going to be  but i think there should be no doubt about the   intent of these laws uh which is to translate  the republican party um from from the majority yeah um you know and and a reminder you know  uh donald trump was telling the big lie in 2016   it just so happened that he won he was raising the  same specter of a rigged election of voter fraud   in urban centers and and uh you know but but  things worked out undocumented immigrants have   been busts and millions of undocumented immigrants  have been busted and vote for hillary clinton   there's no evidence for it produced no evidence  for it was a complete lie yeah and we're   suggesting that that folks show up at the polling  places in places like philadelphia um you know   his supporters show up to protect uh you know the  polls um but what's important about this is that   it's not it's a symbolic belief what he's really  it's like birtherism what he's really saying is   these people even if they have more votes their  votes are illegitimate they shouldn't count and so   you know it doesn't matter if they got more votes  because the votes that i got are real votes and   the votes that they got are lesser votes um  they're illegitimate votes that they're both   some people who aren't really truly american  and therefore despite having fewer votes i   am more legitimate because i am an avatar of  the real americans yeah um i want to ask you   to read one more thing before i ask you one  more question and then we go to the questions   that our audience has and you all have a lot of  really good ones um if you could turn to page 35 and start with um the uh well i guess maybe if you  want to if you just want to explain to people um   you know you were reading uh black reconstruction  by wbd boys and you come to this quote that i want   you uh to uh to read uh and then uh the quote that  comes i mean the paragraph that comes after that   so you want me to read from the  dude boys quote at the bottom   and as no to the reader at the introduction  of black reconstruction du bois writes if   he believes that the negro in america and in  general is an average and ordinary human being   who on a given environment develops like other  human beings and he will read this story and judge   it by the fact seduced if however he regards  the negro as a distinctly inferior creation   who can never successfully take  part in modern civilization   and whose emancipation and enfranchisement were  gestures against nature and he will need something   more than the sort of facts that i've sit down  but this ladder person i'm not trying to convince keep going uh-huh just this the graph right  after that yeah this was an inspiration and a   dark moment i did not set out to write this essay  attempting to convince anyone in my point of view   i was simply laying down the facts as i saw them  and attempting to get the truth as best i could   so that in a different time and place one less  deferential trump than trumpism someone would   be able to access the truth and i think uh a lot  of journalists especially journalists of color   that that kind of was where they ended up in  uh you know at the end of the trump era really   recognizing that um you know the importance of  leaving behind an honest and accurate record   of this moment especially when um you know you saw  just a complete lack of prioritization of facts um   and and just outright lies kind of just dominating  uh the landscape we've been here before in many   ways as you write he you know the president former  president did exactly what he said that he would   um and there were a lot of people who  just were not listening whether that was   journalists or i think it was right i think for  some people um you know there was a kind of double   delusion where it was like there were some  people who were i'm willing to believe that   their fellow citizens were capable of supporting  a man like this um and there were people who   did not believe that trump was the man that  he was they invented a kind of alternative   trump that they could cheer for and believe  in um and so you know both of those groups of   people could not really see him clearly but to be  honest i feel like my depiction of trump is uh you   know i don't feel like there's a lot of daylight  between what i think trump believes and what trump   believes he believes i think that for the most  part the discrepancy comes when the people who   defend trump want to say that he doesn't think  and say and do the things he says and thinks   and does um because of what that how that  would reflect on them but i don't think that   there's a lot of daylight in between what i think  donald trump believes and what donald trump you   know even says that he believes okay well that  makes me want to ask one more then and that is   if you could sit down and ask for president trump  anything you get to go down to mar-a-lago and ask   whatever you want about this presidency about what  he feels like his legacy is what whatever what   what what do you think you would have  what would you want to know from him uh you know i don't have anything to  ask donald trump i think donald trump   is not a particularly interesting person and i  think that this book is not really about trump   because um you know his appetites his vanities um  his impulses are actually quite shallow and one of   the frustrations of the past four years i think is  that um it was hard for people to write the same   stories over and over about trump because he's  not that deep um there's a there's a piece uh you   know that the atlantic public um you know sort of  towards the end of the tournament administration   about this there isn't really that much to  say about trump there's a lot of like sort of   weird criminology that was done sort of trying  to get inside trump's head about what you know   what he thinks what he's doing you know is  he eating burgers at night uh drinking diet   coke watching cable tv in rage um and i think  he's actually just not that interesting i think   the more interesting question is why did the  country choose this man and what is it going   to do now that he's gone and that is what the book  is preoccupied with um it's not preoccupied with   fit with figuring out uh you know what trump  believes or thinks because he has been very open   about those things for people who want to hear  them um and i don't think that there's anything   in particular um more to glean from him  in terms of you know he is pretty up front   um he's telling you what his values are every day  um and i think you know people who want to say   uh well what is donald trump thinking it's  a mystery um simply do not want to accept   what he has put forth for them yeah well  my friend i think you may be one of the few   journalists who currently has a book about this  presidency that uh did not uh either seek to or or   end up engaging with uh him and to to get uh  his thoughts and to try to figure out uh what he   was doing so kudos to you for centering uh this  electorate and and our friends family neighbors   and and the people that we live work and and  love alongside every single day to figure out   what's going on with them and what's going on with  this country so uh with that uh we have got a lot   of questions from readers uh people want to know  uh many things about uh your thoughts on where   we go from here so um i will start with um what  will it take to reshape the thought process of the   current republican party so kind of to your point  about the electorate and where we go from here   um you know i think that that is a very  complicated question and i think to some   extent it's not really something liberals can do  or democrats can do the identity of the republican   party is a republican and conservative project  and i think uh you know all the democratic party   can do is provide competition and extract a  political price for a certain kind of politics   but what the republican party becomes is  up to republicans and now perhaps you know   donald trump's success along the rio grande  valley and in south florida you know maybe that   increases diversity takes the republican party  in a different direction because they now have   a more diverse constituency or maybe that uh more  diverse constituency becomes more accepting of the   principles of the trumpian republican party um you  know i i don't know the answer to those questions   all i can say really is that um this is something  that you know liberals cannot force an identity   crisis inside the republican party it's something  you know political identity formation is   something that is sort of a process internal um  to their coalition but i do know that as long as   a republican party can hold power even with the  minority of the vote by engaging in this kind of   trumpian identity politics they're going to keep  doing that because that's just how politicians   work it's not a question of you know necessarily  right or wrong it is a rational political choice   and unfortunately it's one that's very dangerous  for our democracy yeah uh well related to that uh   it is pop is it possible that we learned that  cruelty is multi-racial uh didn't trump grow   his share of black and hispanic voters what do you  think of that i mean cruelty is a is a human trait   uh you know the book is focused on cruelty and  politics specifically how it's used to demonize   certain groups um and and justify excluding them  from the political process or uh depriving them   of their constitutional rights but it's not  something that's limited to conservatives   or uh or republicans or even white people  that that's just not how human nature works   um you know but but i will say you  know like i said you look at 1932   franklin roosevelt wins the black vote in the  north stunning republicans because they're asking   themselves how could you vote for the party of  jim crow and the answer is that you know the   republican party had largely identified largely  abandoned black voters after reconstruction and   roosevelt was at least offering an economic agenda  that would appeal to them um and so you know that did not turn james eastland into martin  luther king jr um it did not change uh what the   the nature of the democratic party at  least not at that moment but ultimately   uh those voters were able to wrest control  of the party away from the dixiecrats   but you know the fact that trump improved his  margins among voters of color in 2020 that's   important it's a challenge political  challenge for the democratic party   but it doesn't change what trump  stands for what he said or what he did okay we've got uh somebody who wants you to  handicap things here what probability would you   give to a major crisis in the republican party  by the midterms and chastising trump for good   i i i i don't um if you want political strategy or  political prognostication i am the wrong person to   ask i can look at history and i can tell you  you know what happened in the past when we   encountered certain situations how you know i can  use uh the map that historians have drawn for us   to locate um you know where we are but i  cannot um you know i i'm not capable of   predicting the outcomes of elections and  i'm you know i wouldn't even begin to try   what i will say is that typically the  president's party loses seats in the midterms   there are a few exceptions to this george  bush after 9 on 11 bill clinton uh in his   second term after the impeachment backfired on  republicans at least in the midterm but obviously   not in the subsequent presidential election  when uh clinton's successor was defeated   so you know typically you know voters turn  against the president's party in the midterms   and the democrats have very thin margins in both  chambers so it's conceivable they could lose both   absent some very unusual events um i think you  can assume that the democrats are not going to   have a great midterm and that's going to be a  problem because republicans will take from that   that they do not need to change course well  that was a valiant try adam i too am out of   the prediction business in uh american politics  uh but uh with that said one more uh kind of   related question somebody says i've heard it will  take 40 years for the u.s to recover from trumpism   do you agree with that um it's a weird you know i  think that's a weird um frame because i think we   what you have to remember is that america has only  been a true multiracial democracy since 1965 in   the voting rights act um and so you know we're not  recovering from trumpism we are in the midst of a   struggle about what american democracy is going  to be um and that struggle predates donald trump   it was 2013 when john roberts uh you know struck  down the voting rights act because he decided   racism was over and subsequently saw a wave of  laws across the states um you know justifying uh   attempts to restrict the vote um in the name  of partisanship um and and and because the   party is racially polarized you saw republicans  essentially targeting black voters with these   voting restrictions um so you know the question  about whether we're going to recover from trumpism   i think is the wrong one because we're not um  you know trump trump was a manifestation of   these pre-existing political trends but he was not  the creator of them um and so now that he's gone   you know that those structural issues have  not finished um and so i think you know the   question is really are we going to continue  to be a multi-racial democracy um you know   with true political equality or are we going we  are we departing that ideal into something else uh we've got another one uh you've argued that  trump supporters consider lots of people to be   illegitimate as not real americans is it plausible  to believe that 70 plus million people who voted   for him think that um i actually think we need  to distinguish between the marginal trump voter   that is you know someone who might have voted for  him despite um having misgivings about him and the   kind of people who show up at trump rallies um and  wear hats uh and t-shirts with like obscenities   um or or or other kinds of things the kind of  people who really built their political identities   around donald trump and the kind of people who  you know pick someone every four years to vote   for i think those are the two very distinct  varieties of trump supporter um and when i talk   and and you know when you look at the polls um a  significant number of republicans um are bought   in and a significant number of republicans have  you know do accept the outcome of the election   i mean i think you know when  i'm talking about republicans   uh seeing the democratic vote and the democratic  constituencies is illegitimate um i think that   there that is a majority of the republican party  but it is not everybody who voted for donald trump got another question how can pushing  anti-vaccination misinformation   be a winning strategy for republicans um i  think we're in a very polarized environment   and in that kind of environment party  identity partisan identity becomes very   significant and people find ways to rationalize  even if you're a republican who believes in   vaccines who supports vaccination who has  not bought in these conspiracy theories um   you know that doesn't mean you're going  to become a democrat people have strongly   held principles and their political identities  are a big part of who they are and so you know   maybe it's not a sound political strategy in terms  of winning over converts but in terms of will it   cost the republican party tremendously politically  you know maybe but i i don't see the evidence of   that yet what do you think that speaker pelosi  should do regarding kevin mccarthy's nominees   to the january 6 commission how does she keep  them from continuing their story of the big lie   i think that the democrats should  not accept anybody on the commission   who either encouraged the insurrection of january  6 or voted against certification afterwards   there's no reason to put anybody on the commission  who uh you know supports the belief of the writers   that the election should have been overturned  um and merely differs on the question of whether   it should have been overturned by violence or  simply mike pence using abusing his ceremonial   role to somehow determine who the president  united states should be that's not acceptable i think you may get some uh server 2022  uh uh write-in votes uh for that one   uh do you see trumpism growing as we  enter the era of the climate refugees   um if you're if but if by trumpism you mean  nativism uh unfortunately i think that's   likely um you know it would  be nice if what would happen   if the public abandoned those people who who lied  to them about the severity of the climate crisis   when um the effects of the climate crisis become  more and more visible in people's everyday lives   but i think what's more likely is this same  people who have exploited uh the false scarcity   that we are currently living in um to demonize our  groups that are not politically powerful enough to   respond are probably going to pursue that strategy  you know because it has been a successful strategy   are going to pursue that strategy in earnest  when it comes to the effects of climate change uh another question somebody wants to know  more about the future of trump's america   they say i'm terrified is  there any reason to remain calm um you know the answer here you know the book  is about some pretty dark chapters in america american history uh but it's also about this i'm  inspired by that there are people who sacrificed   a great deal to make the world a better place for  their children and grandchildren which is one of   the reasons why i pers i personally  am here and so i don't feel like um   you know obviously things can feel very um dark  and overwhelming at times um but i feel like i i   owe it to the people who went through much harsher  conditions in order to make my life possible   um not to uh give in to despair and i think that's  one way to look at it there are a lot of people   who worked very hard um to create a better  world um in situations that uh you know and   i can't speak to everybody but in in  situations that were much worse than   mine personally um so i i can't they didn't  give in to that despair so so i can't either yeah um somebody's wanting to know if you  have read the recent article by the guardian   describing putin's massive and successful  efforts to put trump in the white house   you know i think we should be very skeptical  of um purported intelligence documents   that seem to confirm our worst suspicions about  anything um you know i don't know the story   uh well enough to question it um but i will say  that i think people should be very skeptical of   any story that seems to tell you everything um  you might want to believe um so you know i think   what we already know is bad enough uh the russian  government tried very hard to interfere in the   2016 election on trump's behalf and trump welcomed  that help and deflected blame from the russian   government when um asked um i don't i haven't seen  any evidence that donald trump you know was um   you know acting at the behest of the the russian  government i think the evidence so far suggests   that he is a short-sighted opportunist uh who  will take help from anywhere because he has   no squirrels um but you know i'm i would be very  skeptical of anything reporting the show more than   that um you know that hasn't been completely  uh you know validated by people who are in a   position to do so uh related to that um as you  recent foreign influence in american elections   has been extremely well documented does adam have  a solution i don't really have a solution i mean   this is kind of you know this is kind of political  problem like foreign interference in american   elections is already illegal you can harden um  the election system against interference and and   the government should do that uh but in terms of  foreign propaganda you know that's a political and   free speech problem that americans are going to  have to deal with on a political level themselves   you know there's no way to protect people from  hearing things uh that are false um we have   uh you know free speech in a country in  this country we have a first amendment   and so you know you can't i mean you can sort  of you can make people register as foreign   agents you can do that kind of thing um but  on some level the american people themselves   have to make or have to be persuaded to  make the right political decisions when   confronted with foreign propaganda it's not really  a question that can be solved um by the government uh somebody else wants to know if you see a link  to trends toward totalitarianism in other places   in the world um i think there's obviously a trend  towards right-wing nationalism in other parts of   the world i don't know how successful ultimately  it's going to be i think one of the significant   projects of the biden administration should be  reviving hope in america and democracy in part by   showing that it can be responsive to the  needs of regular people um totalitarianism is   different from authoritarianism and i don't  think we see we actually see a trend towards   that i think there is a trend towards democratic  backsliding but totalitarianism is an extreme   uh form of authoritarian government um  that i i think um i i do not see a trend   towards that in particular i think what we see  is a kind of right-wing nationalism that is very   dangerous that is undemocratic um but but i  would distinguish between those two things   okay well i'm going to ask you one last  one and and that is um really just about   um where you where you are  talk about where you are at the   end of uh the trump presidency not necessarily  the trump era the trump presidency um you know   these essays that you that you wrote the  reporting and the writing that you've done   um yeah where where are you um with um what  these past five five plus years have meant um   in terms of how you i think you know how  you think about covering this going forward i think in some ways i'm still covering the same  story which is you know who does america want   to be um but also think um you know the ultimate  meaning of the trump administration is really so   being written how we view this chapter in history  has not been determined yet um and to some extent   uh that determinate i mean that determination  will be made by the american people in the   political decisions that they make in  the next few years um the thing about   public memory is that it's malleable um  so how we think of trump now may not be   how people think of trump in five years um power  has a way of manipulating public memory to justify   itself that was one of the fears i had in  the beginning of the trump administration   was that that process was already beginning to  take place i mean and you can see it in in some   sense with um you know things like the capital  riot for people trying to you know call it uh   you know it called the people who were doing  it tourists are trying to minimize the violence   or the intent of the writers themselves um which  was to overturn their election by their own words   um yes so i i think you know where i am is that  it's hard to know what significance this chapter   in american history will have um i don't think  we all know until a few years from now um um that   we're still writing it uh we're still writing this  story um you know even though trump is gone um   his effect his effect as a manifestation  of these pre-existing political trends   uh was tremendous um and it has put us on a  particular course that i don't think we know   where it's leading um and and for that that  reason you know the story is ongoing yeah   well i certainly feel like you have a clearer eye  view at the end of this uh and i wonder what uh   i wonder if you feel like uh the political  press in general is better equipped to cover   this electorate going forward to understand kind  of where we are and where we're going from here   i think if you look at you know the coverage  there was a tremendous improvement i think in   terms of political coverage um in many outlets  towards the end of the trump administration   but i think you know the tradition of nonpartisan  objectivity in american journalism and i'm not and   i want to be clear that i don't have a problem  with actual objectivity but the problem with   political journalism is that it wants to it  wants two parties that are on you know that   have policy disputes but who are basically on  the same plane as far as democracy is concerned   and the republican party's continued  radicalization against democracy   is a real challenge for the press because how  how do you maintain that necessary neutrality   in that kind of circumstance um and i don't you  know and i think you know one way you can in   the trouble is is that the only real way  to do that is to minimize um the threat   or the level of radicalization against democracy  uh that one of the parties is is going through   um you can either do that or you can describe it  accurately and be called a partisan and a liberal   or a democrat or you know a propagandist um and  that's a real challenge um i don't know you know   i i think that it's a um i think that things are  going to be pretty hard for american journalism   going forward not just financially but in terms of  um figuring out how to write this story in a way   that informs readers but also does not soft pedal  um the perils that american democracy was facing   yeah and and you mentioned kind of where you see  the story going from here for you uh can you talk   about just kind of uh in the short term what what  it is that you have your eye on in terms of um our   politics what what it is that you're drawn to in  the moment i don't want to spoil anything so i'm   not going to answer that question but i'm working  on some things that i think y'all will find   um edifying well consider this my rsvp i will  i've already in my mind retweeted and shared   whatever it is that you are working on so uh i  want to thank adam serwer staff writer at the   atlantic and author of the cruelty is the point  the past the present and future of trump's america   and we encourage you to pick up your copy  of adam's new book at your local bookstore   if you'd like to watch more virtual  programs or support the commonwealth   club's efforts please visit commonwealthclub.org   i'm erin haynes thank you all so much take care  and have a good night thank you so much aaron so you

Channel: Commonwealth Club of California

Views: 43,045

Keywords: CommonwealthClub, CommonwealthClubofCalifornia, Sanfrancisco, Nonprofitmedia, nonprofitvideo, politics, Currentevents, CaliforniaCurrentEvents, #newyoutubevideo, #youtubechannel, #youtubechannels, adamserwer

Id: 7zH4lgCiFK4

Length: 60min 35sec (3635 seconds)

Published: Wed Jul 28 2021