Full podcast episode: kzread.info/dash/bejne/pGirrrqHqcfglbw.html Lex Fridman podcast channel: kzread.info Guest bio: John Mearsheimer is an international relations scholar at University of Chicago. He is one of the most influential and controversial thinkers in the world on the topics of war and power.

This guy speaks better than I can possibly write. His language and word choices are so accurate, descriptive and clear.

@la7era1u54

5 ай бұрын

And manipulative. Wouldn't the other side call themselves the "realists". By naming yourself the realist you are showing your biases, as well as displaying an attempt to manipulate people into seeing your side of the argument as the real and correct side

@thzzzt

5 ай бұрын

@@la7era1u54 By "realist" he's contrasting himself with the idealist. The idealist says "Flowers, candy, and universal love for everyone! Yay!" And the realist says "Hey wait those things cost money, we don't have enough, and people just don't work that way." We need both given the circumstance.

@vonfolta

22 күн бұрын

the guy might be well spoken but he's lost in abstract ideas and couldn't make a fire or know how to wipe his own ass in the woods when it came down to it! as far as I can tell the guy is part of the problem that humanity is facing today. he's not contributing to any real solution that the average human being is facing. it's just hogwash!

@pyros4333

15 күн бұрын

And Lex still can't understand him lol

@vonfolta

15 күн бұрын

@@pyros4333 what's there to understand ... the guy is just lost in terminology, intellectualizing ... as if he's lost touch with reality, moving only in abstract thoughts that have no practical application.

Political Science lessons for almost no charge. Thank you Lexa and Mearsheimer.

@stipu_gatibo6772

6 ай бұрын

Lex*

@existentialbaby

6 ай бұрын

you can say aLexA

@gilgamesh6144

6 ай бұрын

for sheeple like you

@SomeSortaPro

5 ай бұрын

almost no charge? I guess I bought the phone and cell service (my method) but I was gonna do that anyway. this is certainly no charge to me. Thanks Lex❤️

@JohnJones-qk7dv

2 ай бұрын

Yup, I feel like I'm in an international politics class.

Fukuyama saying, in the early 90s, that liberal democracy had beaten fascism and beaten communism, so it was going to beat everything else, might be the International Relations version of Disco Stu predicting exponential growth of disco music just based on sales up to 1976.

@stephencalvird7276

3 ай бұрын

LOL

@SimEon-jt3sr

19 күн бұрын

Hell yeah

The comment at around minute 8 sums it up perfectly. Survival trumps prosperity every time. Theres only so much prosperity that's valuable, but if you're dead the whole game of life is over.

@Campingwilder

15 күн бұрын

Live long and prosper. Spock.

"It's amazing how much economic intercourse is taking place in Europe among all the actors" is something I fervently agreed with, and then remembered we were talking about WWI.

@BilalAhmad-ff3xq

6 ай бұрын

History may not repeat but it sure does rhyme. Those who don't know their history are bound to repeat it like our 'leaders'.

@walterwang2011

6 ай бұрын

It's funny he didn't even bother to argue about the institution theory, as we all know UN is a joke😂.

@alexoman177

6 ай бұрын

I really think we (well I don't) do not know much about the economic interdependencies between European countries pre-WWI or even to what granularity of detail is needed to make such an opinion. Furthermore, this a simplistic-one sentence statement that completely underpins a one-sentence statement about one type of geopolitical liberalism. I mean given the context of a KZread interview, Mearsheimer is totally fine with this 50,000-ft level, elementary assertion. That doesn't mean any of this --> we learned anything or any of this is profound, or even true. I think that is what we all have to keep in mind. It's an introductory (for me) STEP-ONE into this discipline. That's what I think everyone should remember (IMHO), it doesn't mean anything in it of itself and has no applicability because it's too simplistic to be meaningful. But that's not Mearsheimer job to remind us, and although he may (or may not) be blowing smoke up our collective asses (because he's wrong or similar, not because of ill intent), he does a really great job phrasing things as propositions, and expressing uncertainty in what he is saying. I appreciate that. It, in this instance, is a sign of honest communication and good-faith engagement.

@BilalAhmad-ff3xq

6 ай бұрын

@@walterwang2011 it's actually amazing the kinds of superstitions that the world modern & it's institutions believe. The guest is correct.

@ballisticdan9135

6 ай бұрын

​@@walterwang2011Probably a destructive force in the world. Possibly straight up evil.

The greatly disciplined approach of the host is reason for the beauty of the discussion; a very long episode that is captivating and enlightening. Thank you Mr. Lex and Prof. J.M

@dingo8babym20

6 ай бұрын

Try enlightening someone that thinks that it's good to undermine democratically elected officials because government usually does bad stuff@bill855

@FoyLo

6 ай бұрын

Or with Trump.

@ast3077

6 ай бұрын

well said

@Joshjames1234

5 ай бұрын

We studied Mearschiemer and Fukuyama at my liberal arts school. Had to take a class called Introduction to International Relations Theory, though.

The Wampanoag tribe leader saw the newcomers as a source of power. They had things of value to trade, like weapons. He helped them survive the harsh winter by bringing food & supplies, and some righteous smoke. Later he saw how he'd misjudged the core variables. What he had viewed as economic dependent liberalism turned out to be a structure of offensive realism.

@lachlanscanlan5621

6 ай бұрын

ha ha cute

Great philosophical explanation

I’ve learned more from this dude abt war/politics in the last week then I think I have from anyone ever

@abbcc555

6 ай бұрын

keep in mind that what you are hearing is his _opinion_, his views are archaic and not fit for today's politics.

@nikolagregic7709

6 ай бұрын

Lol if ur learning from this clown. Gl Amount of nonsense and lies coming out from his mouth about Ukraine conflict is staggering.

I've always viewed the culture war as such an extremest issue, and I feel like I consistently get blasted for telling people that I am unsure what is correct. Mearsheimer does a great job to over arch the left vs right debate here. I always wonder how people in the future will look at our views and depict us, but honestly I feel like I try to be the best person I can and depict political views I think are positive, knowing I can change my mind or be persuaded

@gxqx797

6 ай бұрын

You're in a great place my friend. Very balanced approach and navigating the middle is a teaching bestowed to us by our prophet. Never go extreme in any direction. The next step i suggest is to look into islam. For someone who is clearly intelligent i think it will resonate with you And youre always welcome to cone back here and pop me a question! Take care

@TheMightyWalk

6 ай бұрын

When you have kids you realize you have to pick a side. Society has rules because we are bound to each other through mutual acceptance for what we know of as the accepted societal rules . Just like in your house , you have rules… if someone comes in and violates them … what will you do? Passively stand there and accept it ? That’s weakness someone will end up taking your home

@TheMightyWalk

6 ай бұрын

@@gxqx797what’s denoted as “extreme” is relative . Currently the left is so left even center right is “far right” . People who think they are virtue signaling decency by not having a opinion are not engaging in moderating their own fate

@mr.crowgamer6250

6 ай бұрын

@@TheMightyWalkI’d like to think I’m non aligned because really in the current demographic of things I’m from England so it doesn’t effect me so I live my life normally carrying on not supporting either side but more just dwelling on the fact that more senseless death is happening.. but others around me seem to insert themselves into something they didn’t have any regard for before any of this is mind baffling really..

@mr.crowgamer6250

6 ай бұрын

@@TheMightyWalkI suppose certain individuals feel important when they get rid of that individuality and replace it for religion or to a group for belonging… idk maybe I’m rambling nonsense

Good to see a guest on who is offering a somewhat academic view on the culture war

@moeedmalik9489

6 ай бұрын

He is an academic by profession.

@suslikfromca

6 ай бұрын

self-proclaiming realist who sounds like theoretical physicist: i did not know much about Putin, but i know what he is thinking. 🤷‍♂️

@Guccifer808

5 ай бұрын

@@suslikfromcarussian bot from ca how ironic

@suslikfromca

5 ай бұрын

@@Guccifer808 sorry from NC 🤪 why Russian and not Ukrainian bot 🤔

I don't get how anyone could take Francis "history has ended" Fukuyama seriously anymore, after Ukraine and Israel. The 1000 year long regularly scheduled program isn't over, we just grew up during the commercial break.

@SusanHopkinson

6 ай бұрын

You skipped Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen…

@tatywork9126

6 ай бұрын

thast what i am wondering too.

@MrSpermstar

6 ай бұрын

Take biased "intellectuals" on western payroll such as Fukuyama and Harari seriously at your own peril!

@leonscott543

6 ай бұрын

​@@SusanHopkinsonConveniently because this is the way all civilian brains work within an empire😂 can easily point out world atrocities if they're not themselves at all involved😊

@illuminated2438

6 ай бұрын

So long as the tribe has any power, there will be permanent war. What does the American military do other than follow the commands of the tribe?

I appreciate Lex's willingness to listen and allow: Makes sense and is boiled down to terms I can see. Politicians and intellectuals enjoy and make a living out of clouding and complicating. At the end "will you kill me" or "can I defend myself against you" is the bottom line. He gave me more insights on WWII than previous and again the involvement of USA in need to make and facilitate war. Enjoyable and interesting interview.

@jimmyolsenschannel6263

4 ай бұрын

WWII? I must have missed something.

I live in a democracy that has been at an almost constant state of war for it's entire history. I always found the idea of democracy being peaceful as at best willfully ignorant, at worst the ravings of a crazy person.

@hrissan

5 ай бұрын

Ppl living in less “democratic” societies argue, that it is pillaging and unfair trade that made possible to finance political circus that is democracy. As soon as amount of resources dwindles, so does the democracy. Seems we are witnessing this process in western countries right now.

@closetglobe.IRGUN.NW0

3 ай бұрын

​@hrissan are u saying that those lesser " republics" are a bit more equal?

When did Lewis Black get so serious???

Love that he ends it with a behaviour economics argument.

I’ve never heard the term “economic intercourse “ before. Is that where in international politics, countries that aren’t democracies get economically fucked?

@SusanHopkinson

6 ай бұрын

Sounds about right…

@OminousK

6 ай бұрын

Only makes sense

@Flintknappingtips

6 ай бұрын

Before this comment is removed or buried, I want Lex to know that I think that within all countries the will of the people to democratically elect their leaders is a good thing.

@shafsteryellow

6 ай бұрын

​@@Flintknappingtips😂

@Flintknappingtips

6 ай бұрын

@@shafsteryellow why are you laughing? I don’t expect my comment to make morning. Why laugh at it?

Politics aside John seems like he’d be a good dinner party guest.

@user-fh1do9xb4n

5 ай бұрын

Man, I'd throw a banquet just to be able to listen to Mr.Mearsheimer

this man is a mentor

Severity of conflict should be recognized too. Wars are not all the same.

Basic International relations theory 101

effectively john is describing the varied forms of realism (structured, etc.) in a way which mirrors game theory. game theory posits the most beneficial outcome is derived from a set (individuals, states, etc.) working together (cooperators) until a bad actor (uncooperative) attempts to disrupt the cooperative/trust system. According to game theory, the best outcome of a cooperative system with a bad actor is to break the trust with the set of bad actors, but to extend a modicum of good faith to encourage bad actors to restore their integrity which will strengthen the overall trust system. In short, democratic states should cooperate until a bad actor disrupts the trust, but absolve that bad actor in the hope that they will see the errors in their ways and rejoin the trust system. That is my understanding of john's explanation of realism and how it mirrors game theory.

@ruhruhruhruhruheisjsij

3 ай бұрын

Which further assumes that in order to help absolve the world of bad actors, we need a different approach to bring them back into the game of society without pushing them further into their negatively compounding behaviors and confirmation biases? Maybe?

Very interesting, thank you. Regarding countries willing to abandon prosperity to gain security. One could make an argument that in essence it shows the insecure nature, it's not about power, it's about covering for their insecurities.

Lex I don't ever comment ever but you kept falling asleep during this interview and it was actually good

Great explanation

As some one who supports democracy I should say the argument " democracies don't fight democracies" almost can also be applied to "communist" regimes. They usually didn't (and don't) fight each other but it just proves that they are members of a same league (fun fact: they call themselves democratic!!). Not only this, but also we should consider that unfortunately many of the tyrant dictators in third world countries which wage war against others and even thier own people have been supported by the same western democracies.

@SusanHopkinson

6 ай бұрын

Fun fact, Western Plutocracies call themselves democracies too 😅

@mikeykimm6719

6 ай бұрын

@@SusanHopkinson at this point, it's more like a corportocarcy.

@turmoilstabilizer9054

6 ай бұрын

Great observation!

@motoquipe

6 ай бұрын

Democracies don't "fight" other democracies. They instigate coups instead. For the good of democracy ofcourse...

@pmc609

6 ай бұрын

​@@davidmontgomery1442Also, China and the USSR fought actual battles during the Cold War

Leha, please invite mr.Mearsheimer for one more round. It is a great pleasure to listen to him.

Lex, how could you leave the cap off the coke bottle?

In short - Realistic view versus liberalistic view = riding a horse versus riding a unicorn

March 2003 was a democracy launching a war so good point. Also...he didn't touch on unipolar vs multipolar argument....ussr 1991 still had 1000s nuke heads...the line became a buffer. Awesome discussion.

Conflict at one level means harmony at a higher level.

It is a little bit of everything he said and much more. He did not mentioned huge costs of modern warfare , lack of man power, general dissilusion about true intentions of war in societies and no economic reasons for war, huge cultural changes everywhere in the world.

One thing I would say is that a democracy does not correlate with altruism as a whole, It is geared towards the people it over looks. It is more of a popularity contest not even a meritocracy.

@ruhruhruhruhruheisjsij

3 ай бұрын

But then it gets to what defines a winner in a popularity contest, which gets into the argument that the contest is only a mirror of the collective ideal in people who ultimately decide who becomes voted in as "best-choice" candidate. So it is only as altruistic as the people within

Don't forget about good old fashioned geography.

@TheoSprinkles

6 ай бұрын

The older I get the more I realize that this may be the single biggest factor. It’s the difference between self sufficient producers and dependent consumer states.

If u r a realist, then defensive and offensive reasoning must both be happening at the same time.

Brings me back to Poly Sci 351- International Political Theory

in addition to the less uncertainty arguement, i think another arguement is that, when you support/undermine the legitamacy of a state that shares similar value and institution as you, you are supporting/undermining your own legitamacy, this is especailly true when there are competing sets of value in the world, for example when liberalism spread across europe Monarchs formed alliances to bulwark against it.

The world, Is a business. Simple.

This interview was absolutely incredible, eye opening and mind blowing. I watched many of his videos and I agree on every single word with the professor. It’s a shame people who run the USA are so foolish, they need to learn from prof Mearsheimer.

@howardkong8927

4 ай бұрын

Well, the USA is a democracy--presidents wouldn't have wisdom if the electorates don't.

@reginaldpoofta5

4 ай бұрын

@@howardkong8927 well.. they call is "democracy" but its even wikipedia says its "Flawed democracy"

if realism is pursuing survival and liberalism is pursuing prosperity, then a better framework of what to pursue is to pursue prosperity while not ignoring survival. as clearly when either ONLY survival OR only prosperity is pursued, the only outcome is conflict. Know the nuance!

I think Mearsheimer's point is well illustrated by modern China: When it comes down to security vs. prosperity, security wins.

People who think that everyone will get along under some impossible circumstances are naive. If everything is perfect on every level, there will still be someone who just wants to watch it burn, or have a bigger crown, or want to take from others for some other reason. You have to treat one another respectfully and also be capable of absolute darkness to hold each other accountable. I wish things could be fair and nice, but if you count on that you will get taken advantage of.

@timchildress2048

6 ай бұрын

"Fear knocked on the door. Faith opened the door and no one was there."

Love Lex and Mersheimer is always so succinct and on point. His logical reasoning is rock solid.

One of his realistic view points at 5:25 is a good and marvelous political thought as he say Democracy when each of opponents know each other trust will be built then eliminate possibility of waging war reference can be found the theory laid down by Fukuyama the End of History.

That’s a lot of fine handled ideation ya got there Professor! But have you looked recent at the ground beneath your feet. Nobody can land there. That’s no compromise.

“You and I,” you were right the first time

How much does it cost to be on your show Lex?

KZread chill on the ads

Fascinating insight. Makes you wonder just how many pawns are we?

The easiest way to become more powerful when you are mightiest of all is to maintain good relations around you which will eventually corner your worst enemy leaving no option than to retreat itself.

Excellent contend

If a large group of people are working on a project, and an argument breaks out between two people; if the larger group starts egging them on, then it is on. But if the larger group breaks it up and pushes for everyone to get back to work, there is a better chance that the friends intervene and prevent the fight. DUH Anything else is corruption.

What is the Ben Gurion Canal?

Magnificent.

It is not only nations that compete with each other but companies compete with eachother too. Therefore economic intercourse between nations alone cannot guarantee peace because both of these apparently distinct type of competitions are in reality closely linked to each other. In two ways. The companies serve the interest of the state of their origin by keeping the core know how and R&D within the state of the origine and they use also the political power of the state of the origine when competing with other companies in a foreign country.

It’s sweet the way they both think that there’s even such a thing as a modern democracy.

Unless the simple explanation is "it's complicated", you are probably being told a story that is appealing for reasons other than being true.

@robsmith7928

6 ай бұрын

❤

Want to see world peace in real time? Go up to someone and just stand there. There you go, world peace.

This concept of the structure of the system of power was beautifully showcased by the prisoner's dilemma game, where a defensive realist(tit for tat approach) can only place 2nd or tie with some other player in the power struggle, whereas a more careful-greedy or a greedy but calculated approach might get a player to the top of the power struggle, but rarely. And If you look closely, this has been the course of human history all along, where empires try to gain more and more power and eventually the system's punishment catches up-to them. Its a vicious cycle.

Makes sense and all.. But I fear its missing its counterpart, I'm left wondering how the 'structure' aka blackrock/state st. play into it..? When do we start defining what and who is calling the shots in the structure..?

Thanks for this clarification of world-power views. Very insightful. I have always been disgusted by Mearsheimer's unsympathetic views on the Ukrainian-Russian War but now I understand why.

My new favourite words are “economic intercourse”

Interesting ♥

Good to see you interviewing someone with a brain, instead of populist grifters like Shapiro.

@ChatGPT1111

6 ай бұрын

Yer panties still in a bind?😂😂😂 You see something new, but still have to regress to where it hurts. Does Trump still live in your brain rent free 😂😂😂

“Survival” meaning “the policies of one country don’t benefit your own country so corporations and politicians send you to die”. Or in America’s history “a country has something you want so liberate them”

Its like that episode of trailor park boys when ricky went to that pharmacy to get some shampoo for bubbles kitties.

10:17 "What drives competition and war is the structure of the system, it's anarchy." It's government, not anacrhy.

8:00 I believe that the use of the word "survival" is insufficient as, IMO, the realistic state does not have a general sense of survival, but one of identity (ie state's history, culture, territory etc) survival. States leading from the perspective of an Ego, an identity (other than the general one: humanity as a specie) will always have the mission to conserve its identity. IMO, a state's mission should be prosperity of the human kind. This is dependable on a multitude of factors which put together lead to complex networks and patterns. In order to sail this sea of variables, my indication is to side with those whom have created/done no harm and will abide by this core rule.

Lex is sound chill out fam!

I loved his guest but my god, Lex paraphrases what his guest says so badly. He tried to "unpack" a few times during this clip and each time he showed he just misunderstood what his guest was saying.

@davidjackson4606

2 ай бұрын

He always does this it’s so infuriating! Rather simple shit too

@astericks53

2 ай бұрын

Hes not summerizing for you, he’s predicting what the guest is implying (its extreme) and whatever the guest makes it a point to refute means that the other aspects of his question is along the right lines

@gtamyths96

Ай бұрын

Lex is an idiot

@FelonyVideos

Ай бұрын

Perhaps a little annoying, but Lex' strength is that he isnt adversarial, but instead, seeking knowledge. Lex is exceptionally smart, but his greatest strength, in my opinion, is acting stupid.

@jyc313

Ай бұрын

I prefer him over Joe Rogen. At least Lex is better about selecting guests. Sometimes I think Rogen’s guests are nut jobs or self professed “experts”, that just stoke conspiracy or spread misinformation

Might makes right.

It's not that Democracies dont fight other Democracies. It's that they are a lot less likely to. That's the argument.

6:16 Economic intercourse is a term im going to use from now on. This guys vocabulary is outstanding. I mean that genuinely.

I don't want peace I want problems always

The UN was a good concept of the balance of power amongst countries. Unfortunately it was captured by superpower countries & it has become very useless. We have seen superpowers give them the middle finger whenever they attack less powerful countries since it's inception.

"war is an instrument of statecraft" ament

@antpoo

6 ай бұрын

Politics by other means.

Interviewers like Lex and Joe Rogan that actually let the interviewee speak....are priceless. Before I listen to an interview I scan the video, and if I see the stupid interviewers face too much, I skip it.

Peace is not profitable. Just like good health.

If international competition and aggression is too normal to eliminate, how about just an international agreement to resist and defeat if possible invasion to take territory? Economic and maybe many kinds of armed competition would not be included, but only the taking of territory that characterizes the most destructive of wars.

Heal within, balance the Earth.

Interesting stuff. This is called 'realist theory' and yet even material science doesn't understand what's real or not. Mental gymnastics... It may move the needle a little bit, but don't think it is pointing us in the right direction

To me some states are Offensive Realists while others are Defensive Realists.

12:02 aggressive realism seems like a self propagating/self fulfilling view point. You believe that everyone is out for power at every possible opportunity, which in turn makes you out for power at every turn as well for survival.

@howardkong8927

4 ай бұрын

It is, but that is not the main factor. Consider a situation where you have a market bubble of Tulip flowers. Then the idea that "Tulip flowers would crash in price" is a self-fulfilling view point. Everyone believes that the flower would decrease in price, so they would be urged to sell it fast, which lowers its price. But you cannot say that this view point **caused** the price crash of Tulip flowers. The unstable state of a bubbled market was the **cause**. The view point is merely something that set it off. If a system can be set off by a single view point, then it's the system, not the view point, that is causing the problem. Same goes for offensive realism. The view point can indeed create the self-fulfillment you have just said. But that is not the **cause** of offensive realism. The anachy between the countries is the cause--it is this structure that sets up the unstable state of the world. The view point of offensive realism is merely setting it off.

Exponential function

agree

The competition for power will never end until there is a winner or we are all dead. The only way to win the competition for power is world submission.

John, the core variable in your theory is NOT survival, it IS hegemony and the benefits comes with it. 7:57

@skydragon23101979

6 ай бұрын

His core theory is survival and prosperity for the sustainable future. When you don’t have an overwhelming power on the international stage you want to be the overwhelming power to protect your own interests.

I can't focus on anything but that half bottle of coke.... I haven't had soda in a while 🥤

On the first aspect of liberal worldview, democratic peace among liberal democracies, I believe Fukuyama overlooks one point. Liberal super power democracies hinder and block democracies in third world countries through war, expansion, coups and any other tools that helps stealing their resources or in general keeps the super powers' interests satisfied.

Anarchy does not mean inter state war. The common measure against anarchy is encapsulation, closing the border. Anarchy is an intra-state, ie. civil war precursor. Here, it is a severe factor and every citizen should strive to avoid the anarchy in his own state. On the international scene, anarchy may not be desirable but is hardly the decisive factor to wage a war.

Economic interdependency will eventually lead to one side out competing the other so its back to Survival. Neither is more or less peaceful as outcome is the same. Eventually the survivalist will splinter off into two groups and back to square one again.

@roarblast7332

6 ай бұрын

My problem with this thinking is the fundamental idea that this all ultimately zero sum. I think that's false.

@mochutasull739

6 ай бұрын

@@roarblast7332 Eash iteration humanity has evolved to be stronger.

Has there ever been a democracy vs democracy war ?

It seems that in in non democratic nations survival and prosperity are two seperate things, whereas, at least from the ruling parties perspective, prosperity and survival are the same thing.

Best guests

Im a realist. Been called negative my whole life. Negative? Theres only one reality its got nothing to do with perspective.

Q: What is peace? A: Peace is what comes after war. Every. Single. Time.

I've not heard liberalism used in this way before. I almost feel like there is a better term for him to use. To my knowledge, liberalism is more about internal state power distribution, focusing more on the power and rights of the individual. It's usually used in opposition to collectivism.

Btw is is possible to have a Liberal Vision with a Realist outlook?

Some men just want to watch the golden Goose cook