John Mearsheimer on the Battle Between Liberalism vs Nationalism

Very good. I’ll have a look for Konstantin.

Obviously, he is using a 70 or 80-year-old definition of liberalism. That’s more like classic liberalism not what we see today in America as what’s called liberalism. He should make that distinction in the very beginning. Because most of what he describes as a liberal in the beginning sounds like most conservatives today. It’s almost like they have flipped.

who's the redhead babe who pops up at the beginning & at 18 min??

The difference between "I'm going to impose my personal moral standards on the rest of the world" and "we're going to impose our will on the rest of the world as a nation." This isn't problematic in America because we are a multiethnic inclusive society.

Demonizing nationalism is self sabotage. A nation is the people. The fact that caring about your people is considered a bad thing tells you who the bad guys are.

To be honest, I don't think either of the George Bushes cared a cat's fart for the democratic rights of individuals in any country, not even in their own.

Surprising to hear a "Realist" geo-political analyst repeating at face value the lame cover stories of oil tycoon imperialists.

This is really great! John's argument very much seems to me like some version of the cultural relativism debate. I agree with him that the US should not intervene even though such a view invites the criticism that non-intervention means complicity in oppression of whosever individual rights are violated. I don't know how he would get out of this. But I am glad he made the distinction with genocide even though in the real world genocide may be taking place without the outside world really finding out about it till it's too late. Or getting bogged down in a protracted debate about whether genocide is really taking place or not. Take Israel and Gaza. Is what the Israelis are doing over there genocide? Could the fact of genocide actually be a matter of opinion? I'd say yes. Same with the Armenian genocide. And it goes back to John's great point that we humans can't agree on first principles. Each likes to stick to their own truth. People used to resolve such radical differences with wars. Or we'll just have to learn to live with each other - but especially with RADICAL DIFFERENCE! This is where I think most of us just fail.

Nationalism has to go out all over the world

🤣🤣🤣😃👍🇧🇷🇷🇺🇮🇳🇨🇳🇿🇦➕️👍👏👏👏

It’s global jewery vs nationalism

I believe professor Mearsheimer to be fundamentally mistaken. The United States does not invade other countries to establish liberal democracy but to gain access to the natural resources of invaded countries. If the United States government has proven anything over the past 250-odd years, it's that it does not give a damn about the comfort and wellbeing of its own citizens, let alone those of other countries.

Greetings from Bolivia 🇧🇴

Why dont men like him rule in the US?

Very naive interviewer. It seems that he's not into the actual debate, so he keeps asking stupid questions and John has invest his energy with impertinences as: "is the state good or bad?". Come on.

Terrible dialect 😅

Liberal Democracy begins at home. You discuss and try to agree but in the end if you cannot, the head of the family has to decide. At the same time we have an outer door and some outsiders are welcome to visit us for a while. We don't let the outsiders run our family and we don't force ourself on other families. Same with nations. 😊

This construction is less informed than Individualism vs. Collectivism. That's where the real struggle is.

How the collective responds, "liberal/ expansive or "nationalist/protective" is of interest to the collective ruling clique and its victims.

How the collective contests with/diminishes the individual is what we individuals suffer.

He's a great analyst - & called the Ukraine debacle a decade in advance. However the idea that the US is motivated by the desire to spread liberal democracy seems very wrong to me. If you look at every such intervention, it is has been in a place where money could be made by the US corporations that bankroll the politicians who start the wars. Democracy is a handy figleaf, but little more if you look at the record.

To confirm this thesis, you need only look at what the US actually did on intervening. E.g. in Iraq, it immediately occupied the Oil Ministry & took over the oil infrastructure - & cancelled the planned elections.

As soon as Athens adopted Democracy it decided it had the right to force it on others leading to the Peloponnesian War. Immediately following the French Revolution France would spread its ideals by the sword across Europe. Ditto for the Comintern after 1917.
Liberlism in all its forms and for all its smug sanctimony is more a bloody religion spread by the sword than a sound political system.
Just look at the militaristic jihad the United States has been engaged in for the last 25 years under the guise of national-building. A term almost demonic in its being the complete opposite of what took place which was the destruction of nations.

NO!. America was NOT Anglo-Saxon from the beginning. The USA was Cherokee, Navajo, Apache, etc., BUT...when the Anglo-Saxons crossed the Atlantic they came to slaughter millions and native people, and established anti miscegenation laws, so it became white. HISPANIC culture is older than Anglo-Saxon culture...see the cities: Los Angeles-Nevada-San Francisco- San Antonio-El Paso, etc. In addition, AMERICA is a continent from Chile to Canada.

great conversation.

John indirectly admits ISLAM defeated Liberalism...hahahaahahhaa ISLAM ALWAYS WINS Yesterday today and tomorrow. Islam will outlast America's existence.

John does very good explanations, when the host lets him finish what he is saying....

So sorry but there was nothing noble about bombing the hell out of Afghanistan and Iraq. In both those situations the US went into to destroy the axis of evil post. Those countries were a security threat to the US post 9-11. What is this strange re-writing of history? I am clearly missing something.

Both are distractions, shadows on Plato’s cave wall. The real light is the international War / Drug / Oil industries.

Yes remake the world in the Wests’ image

Last time I check, Israel is Jewish state and kingdom of Saudi Arabia is monarch and guess what USA is fine with it. USA uses liberal democracy as a cover to wedge war, not impose it. Professor needs to review his view!

Individualism means something specific, which John doesnt seem to acknowledge.

If you should not dictate your neighbour about how to live, which is the case in those liberal countries, you definitely should not try to dictate other nations about how to live. As a non-liberal, non-westerner, I grealty respect Professor Mearsheimer, because he is one of the few liberals who actually respect this very simple moral rule. Unfortuntaely, however, this simple foundation is really lost in the foreign policy of liberal nations, most notably the United States.

This man wants to live in a liberal state, but advocates for authoritarian regimes.

There is need to distinguish between nationalism and patriotism. Nationalism is loyalty to an ethnic group, its language, its culture, its history. Patriotism is loyalty to a country and its political institutions, symbols, etc.

Nationalism and liberalism are ideas made up in the ego mind. Human beings create ideas. These particular ideas are created to separate people through labels that literally mean nothing to genuine healthy sane living societies. At all.

Crusader Liberalism is not that different to Al-Qaeda and ISIS.
The lliberal holy wars for democracy and capitalism for their point of view. State terrorism from my point of view.

Weak men create hard times . Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times.... good times create weak men. Nationalists are strong men. Liberalism today is the weakest of men.

Mr Mearsheimer mentioned that liberalism in the first place appeared as an answer to challenges faced by European societies. Religious wars, economic transformations etc. But other societies have different histories and cultures and even climate: the belief that individual is more important than the society is not universal. Asian cultures usually tend to give much more importance to family and community, and if you are liberal you should accept that they are entitled to their views. This 'liberal crusade' is based on exceptionalism and belief that your views are more valuable - exactly like colonialism and, actually, nazism, were based on this European/Western sense of superiority. It is just better hidden and more subtle now

When the US creates A world that primarily assimilates it's Anglo Saxon model it renders it's control of the world complete

Rob, try slowing down and speaking as Mearsheimer does. It's very difficult to listen to you constantly tripping over your own tongue as you try to get all your words out at once.

Gaza has destroyed western imperialist liberalism

Multi culti is a failure

Rights and RESPONSIBILITIES

As a Canadian resident and historian I can state that Canada did not want to separate from Britian. Britain pushed us to get our own constitution in 1982.

I really like John Mearsheimer, but he talks in the language of an average man. Unfortunately this is not how realpolitik works. George Friedman (Stratfor) probably would be laughing while watching this interview. Liberalism is just like Christianity in the past - the ideology to justify why citizens of one country have the right to invade and enslave another country. Fascism plays the same role as we know. It does not matter what ideology you follow, as Marxism perfectly explains the more important is what economical basis you have. If a small group rules the country, it may use a different ideology and change it when it is required (monarchism -> liberalism -> fascism -> liberalism again), but people will not be protected from wars. See what happened to prosperous Livia... It is nothing to do with 'good intend' of giving liberalism to the citizens of the country, but just justification to break the country.

Rob, when will you learn that there is no think like race.

How can you ignore the Billions of Dollars of war profiteering and say US interventions were "well intended"?
It is an insult to the victims.

What the fuck does this have to do with class is my question. Individualism assumes one can be an individual and make it, pretty wife and something to call his own. If you don't have that none of what this man says matters.