Geopolitical conflict is defined by the fundamental split between maritime orders that compound wealth through open trade and continental empires that burn capital through territorial conquest. (2:01)
Pressuring adversaries with unlimited objectives like leadership assassination or regime change activates the military principle of 'death ground', forcing even fragile nations to fight with total, lethal commitment. (23:56)
Personalized authoritarian regimes lack peaceful institutional transition mechanisms, ensuring that Vladimir Putin's death or removal will trigger violent, unpredictable internal power struggles. (37:26)
Vital grand strategy hinges on negative objectives—preventing catastrophic conflicts before they escalate—which populist leaders often neglect in pursuit of visible, short-term political victories. (4:34)
Detailed notes
## Background
This interview was published on October 29, 2026, on the YouTube channel The Diary Of A CEO, hosted by Steven Bartlett. In the episode, renowned geopolitical strategist and retired U.S. Naval War College professor Dr. Sarah Paine discusses escalating global tensions, decoding the actions of leaders like Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping while explaining why shifting away from a rules-based maritime order invites economic and geopolitical disaster.
## TL;DR
Dr. Sarah Paine analyzes the global divide between maritime trading orders that compound wealth and continental land empires that burn it through territorial aggression. She argues that short-sighted populist policies, isolationist tariffs, and strategic hubris—exemplified by U.S. missteps in Iran and the abandonment of alliances—severely destabilize the international economy and national security. Focusing on the war in Ukraine, she explains how backing an adversary into 'death ground' sparks lethal resistance while draining Russian resources and isolating Moscow. Ultimately, Paine warns that dictatorial regimes inevitably face chaotic internal collapse upon their leaders' deaths, making the preservation of multilateral institutions and the defense of democratic allies essential to preventing another global conflict.
## Atmosphere & style
The conversation carries an urgent, sober, and authoritative tone, driven by Dr. Paine's rapid-fire delivery of hard-nosed strategic realities and deep historical analogies. Bartlett acts as an inquisitive, reflective anchor, allowing Paine to unpack sweeping grand strategies alongside visceral human costs with clinical clarity. It feels intellectually intense and unsettling yet deeply grounded, balancing sweeping century-long historical patterns with an impassioned moral plea to protect future generations from preventable global catastrophe.
## Bulletin
- [02:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=121s) Geopolitical conflict is defined by the fundamental split between maritime orders that compound wealth through open trade and continental empires that burn capital through territorial conquest.
- [23:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1436s) Pressuring adversaries with unlimited objectives like leadership assassination or regime change activates the military principle of 'death ground', forcing even fragile nations to fight with total, lethal commitment.
- [37:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2246s) Personalized authoritarian regimes lack peaceful institutional transition mechanisms, ensuring that Vladimir Putin's death or removal will trigger violent, unpredictable internal power struggles.
- [04:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=274s) Vital grand strategy hinges on negative objectives—preventing catastrophic conflicts before they escalate—which populist leaders often neglect in pursuit of visible, short-term political victories.
## Key takeaways
- [02:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=121s) The international system is fundamentally divided between wealth-compounding maritime powers reliant on open sea lanes and rule of law, and continental land empires driven by wealth-destroying territorial conquest.
- [04:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=274s) Negative strategic objectives—preventing catastrophic crises such as wars or infrastructure failures—are the most crucial government functions, yet they routinely go uncredited because success looks like uneventful normalcy.
- [07:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=420s) Engaging in conflict in narrow choke points like the Persian Gulf paralyzes forward military infrastructure, degrades global maritime commerce, and shifts heavy economic costs onto the initiator.
- [09:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=578s) American foreign policy frequently suffers from elite hubris and 'half-court tennis', obsessing over domestic intentions while ignoring the operational capabilities and historical mindsets of adversaries.
- [12:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=745s) Geopolitical decision-makers must distinguish between manageable 'situations' that require long-term containment and solvable 'problems', as attempting to eliminate complex situations creates catastrophic overextension.
- [15:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=941s) Committing a pivotal error permanently closes off superior strategic alternatives, as seen in Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which depleted decades of Soviet military reserves and unified Ukrainian resistance.
- [23:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1436s) Imposing unlimited objectives on an adversary places them on 'death ground', removing any incentive to surrender and transforming even dysfunctional states into lethal opponents.
- [36:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2172s) Compounding economic growth relies on rule-of-law stability, while unilateral tariffs and unpredictable foreign wars severely depress growth rates and multiply the decades required to double national wealth.
- [37:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2246s) Dictatorships project outward invulnerability until they suddenly shatter, caught in a trap where leaders cannot safely retire without facing death or asset forfeiture from their successors.
- [41:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2470s) China's diplomatic backing of Russia is transactional rather than ideological, using Moscow's diplomatic isolation to secure deeply discounted resources and displace American global influence.
- [01:16:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4610s) Eastern European nations actively sought NATO integration due to historical memory of brutal Soviet domination, purges, and the seizure of power ministries following World War II.
- [01:13:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4423s) At the strategic level of warfare, tactical or operational battlefield victories are entirely useless if they fail to secure long-term national security and domestic economic prosperity.
- [01:28:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5321s) Russia faces acute structural and demographic drain, with approximately 40 percent of its budget diverted to defense, high interest rates, and conscripts drawn primarily from single-child households.
- [01:32:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5536s) Upon Vladimir Putin's death, the absence of functional electoral institutions will trigger an unpredictable, mafia-style power struggle among rival networks and armed veterans.
- [01:36:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5819s) Xi Jinping's forced assimilation campaigns against Uyghurs in Xinjiang stem from Chinese Communist Party analysis attributing the Soviet collapse to administrative boundaries delineated along ethnic lines.
- [01:40:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=6012s) Political leaders have a moral duty to future generations to safeguard the rules-based international order, even if doing the right thing means losing the next electoral cycle.
## Detailed walkthrough
### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=0s) Barreling Toward World War and the Normalization of Lies
The conversation opens with an urgent warning about the perilous trajectory of contemporary global geopolitics, drawing chilling comparisons to the lead-up to World War II. Once large-scale conflicts ignite, halting their momentum becomes nearly impossible, yet the international stage is currently dominated by reckless leaders at the helm of powerful nations who routinely deceive the public. Dr. Sarah Paine notes that normalizing untruths carries catastrophic historical consequences, reminding listeners that the Soviet Union disintegrated primarily because its entire foundation rested on fabricated reality. As Steven Bartlett confesses his confusion over the dizzying swirl of modern conflicts, Dr. Paine emphasizes how rapidly the geopolitical landscape is shifting.
Dr. Paine diagnoses the present instability as a cascading crisis fueled by erratic, historically unqualified autocrats and leaders indulging in unprovoked entanglements. She points out that while Vladimir Putin upended the global board by invading Ukraine, Donald Trump pursued an ill-conceived recreational conflict with Iran that wreaked havoc on domestic economic stability, severed vital American alliances, and inflicted massive collateral damage on the worldwide economy. When Bartlett brings up claims that Trump negotiated a diesel export arrangement with Russia, Dr. Paine immediately dismisses it as transparent propaganda, clarifying that Russia completely lacks the domestic refining and export capacity to deliver diesel at quantities that could alter global market realities.
- The global situation is characterized as a ruptured logjam where unchecked conflict threatens to expand indefinitely because neither side possesses the political will to withdraw once committed.
- Historical precedent shows that state-level deceit is self-defeating; ideological and imperial structures built on systemic fabrications inevitably collapse under their own weight.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: The Cycle of Unchecked Escalation
accDescr: A flowchart illustrating how reckless decisions and systemic lies lead from initial conflict to global economic and alliance breakdowns.
subgraph Decisions["Reckless Leadership"]
A["Autocratic Aggression & Recreational Wars"]
B["Normalization of Systemic Lies"]
end
subgraph Escalation["Strategic Fallout"]
C["Unstoppable Conflict Escalation"]
D["Global Economic Contraction"]
E["Shattered Alliance Networks"]
end
A --> C
B --> C
C --> D
C --> E
```
[02:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=121s) The Maritime Rules-Based Order vs. Continental Empire
Reflecting on recent turmoil—from street rioting and civil disorder witnessed in Paris to multi-theater fighting in Eastern Europe and the Middle East—Bartlett asks where this chain of falling dominoes truly began. Dr. Paine frames international history not as a series of isolated events, but as a long continuum defined by a profound structural divide between two rival models of power: continental land empires versus the maritime world order. Continental powers operate on the archaic premise that territory itself is the primary currency of power. In this framework, expansion requires forcibly seizing land from neighbors, a predatory enterprise that inevitably incinerates wealth through destruction and endless garrisoning.
In sharp contrast, maritime powers—pioneered historically by Great Britain and later expanded into a universal rules-based architecture—fundamentally transformed the currency of power following the Industrial Revolution. By elevating commerce, open industry, and international trade above raw territorial conquest, maritime systems discovered the mechanism of compounded wealth. This rules-based system provides the universal standards that make modern global life possible: it ensures that an entrepreneur’s credit card functions seamlessly across continents and protects multinational businesses from arbitrary state confiscation. Dr. Paine warns that if short-sighted billionaires continue bankrolling continentalist, authoritarian regimes, they are actively gutting the very framework that created their fortunes, ultimately ensuring their own ruin and leaving future generations to inherit global conflict.
> "The continentalist world is all about taking territory for others, right? And when you're doing that, you're burning wealth because you've watched it in all these places." — Dr. Sarah Paine
- **Continental Model:** Power is derived strictly from land and territorial conquest; wealth is perpetually burned through military occupation, war, and border friction.
- **Maritime Rules-Based Model:** Power is derived from compounding wealth via global industry, secure sea lanes, predictable legal jurisdictions, and universal standards of trade.
- **Billionaire Paradox:** Modern oligarchs who fund or enable continentalist autocracies fail to recognize that their capital exists solely due to the protections of the international rules-based order they are undermining.
[04:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=274s) Negative Objectives: The Invisible Work of Governments and Deterrence
When Bartlett questions whether warnings of an impending world war are simply routine alarmism repeated every decade, Dr. Paine introduces the essential strategic distinction between positive and negative objectives. A positive objective involves actively making an identifiable event occur, such as capturing an adversary like Nicolás Maduro and locking him in a New York jail cell—an outcome that is visible, measurable, and easily celebrated. Conversely, a negative objective centers on deterrence and prevention: stopping a catastrophe from taking place. Because one cannot empirically prove how many crises or world wars were successfully averted through deterrence, societies often undervalue the investments required to keep peace intact.
Dr. Paine compares governance to parenting a small child on the bustling streets of New York City. A parent repeatedly saves their child’s life simply by holding their hand so they do not bolt into oncoming traffic, yet no one tallies the disasters that never occurred. In the same way, the core purpose of competent government is achieving negative objectives: maintaining bridge safety inspections to avert structural collapses, licensing professionals to prevent institutional malpractice, ensuring literacy through public education, and sustaining military deterrence to prevent foreign invasion. Because success in negative objectives looks like an ordinary, uneventful day, citizens mistakenly assume their institutions are accomplishing nothing, blinding them to the looming dangers when strategic deterrence is discarded.
> "And so governments don't actually get credit for what they do because on a normal day it's normal." — Dr. Sarah Paine
> "Well, you've got to prevent these things from breaking out because once they break out, then things are really over." — Dr. Sarah Paine
- Positive objectives produce visible, verifiable outcomes (e.g., direct military strikes, snatching a foreign leader).
- Negative objectives represent the invisible preservation of stability (e.g., maintaining deterrence, infrastructure inspections, preventing societal collapse).
- Public perception suffers from a systemic bias: when negative objectives succeed, peace feels effortless and citizens falsely believe their governments are inactive.
[07:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=420s) The Strategic Incompetence of the Iran Conflict
Dr. Paine identifies the military escalation against Iran as an extraordinary case study in grand strategic malpractice. The foundational rule of sound strategy dictates that if a nation must fight, it must structure the conflict to impose maximum costs onto the adversary while rigorously insulating its own society and economy. The campaign in Iran inverted this rule entirely: while inflicting severe localized pain on Tehran, it crippled the American economy, fractured key alliances, and destabilized global commerce. By threatening worldwide energy markets and general trade stability, Washington effectively degraded its standing from an occasional geopolitical nuisance into the primary adversary of nations whose economic survival depends on open lanes of commerce.
This failure stems from a disastrously one-sided strategic assessment that measured only American strengths and Iranian weaknesses while ignoring American vulnerabilities and third-party reactions. In any war involving narrow littoral choke points, sea lanes shut down almost instantaneously due to shore-based missiles, artillery, and naval mines—a dynamic already proven when Ukraine effectively neutralized Russian naval operations in the Black Sea. Consequently, conflict around the Persian Gulf naturally choked the Strait of Hormuz, cutting off access for Gulf states lacking alternate coastlines. This blind spot instantly compromised the primary United States naval headquarters in Bahrain, leaving American naval forces with no viable option other than falling back approximately 2,500 miles away to the isolated outpost of Diego Garcia. Dr. Paine attributes this strategic decay to a degradation in national security leadership, contrasting the seasoned counsel of figures like General James Mattis during the first Trump administration with the current leadership under Pete Hegseth, who has prioritized military culture-war purges and testosterone testing over basic operational competence.
> "Well, this war has trashed the US economy. It has blown the US alliance system. Yes, Iran is hurting without a doubt, but it is also has the collateral damage of taking down the world's economy." — Dr. Sarah Paine
> "That base would be 2,500 miles away and that little base is like in the middle of nowhere." — Dr. Sarah Paine
- **Strategic Asymmetry:** Effective warfare shifts financial and structural burdens onto the adversary; flawed strategy creates self-inflicted economic devastation and global alienation.
- **Narrow Seas Reality:** Modern littoral waters close rapidly in wartime; shore-based artillery, drone swarms, and minefields make waterways like the Black Sea and the Strait of Hormuz completely impassable for commercial and naval shipping.
- **Naval Base Vulnerability:** The operational paralysis of the US Fifth Fleet naval facilities in Bahrain forces logistical retreats of up to 2,500 miles to the remote British Indian Ocean Territory of Diego Garcia.
- **Leadership Brain Drain:** Institutional military expertise has been displaced by ideological screening, personnel firings, and bizarre biological testing protocols within the Department of Defense.
[09:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=578s) American Hubris and “Half-Court Tennis”
Dr. Sarah Paine begins by criticizing the lack of historical qualifications among decision-makers in foreign policy, arguing that an inability to understand history makes leaders profoundly dangerous to their own children's future and to the political institutions they represent. When asked what these policymakers expected to happen, Dr. Paine introduces the frameworks of Type A and Type B American hubris:
* **Type A Hubris:** The mistaken belief that every decision that truly matters in global affairs occurs exclusively within the United States.
* **Type B Hubris:** The assumption common among technological elites and high achievers that exceptional competence in one specialized field automatically translates into universal mastery across all disciplines, lacking the humility to recognize personal blind spots and seek out divergent opinions.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Two Types of American Hubris
accDescr: Dr. Sarah Paine's classification of Type A and Type B American hubris and their consequences on policy.
subgraph HubrisTypes["Forms of Hubris"]
A["Type A Hubris<br/>Belief that all critical global decisions happen inside the US"]
B["Type B Hubris<br/>Belief that expertise in one domain equates to mastery in all fields"]
end
Dr. Paine laments that current policy circles have discarded rigorous debate across party lines in favor of sycophancy: “They’ve committed pivotal errors. They have permanently damaged US national security.” When the host notes that a sitting president has discussed annexing sovereign nations—pointing to Donald Trump’s rhetoric on taking Venezuela, absorbing Canada as a 51st state, and assuming that toppling the Iranian leadership would trigger an effortless democratic uprising—Dr. Paine identifies him as a classic continentalist who views the world strictly through the lens of a real estate developer.
She contrasts this mindset with what she terms "half-court tennis," where a nation focuses entirely on its own baseline without paying attention to the opponent's side of the net. Drawing an analogy to football enthusiasts who meticulously study opposing teams, rosters, and tactics, she emphasizes that American leadership fails to analyze its adversaries. By contrast, she highlights Iranian political media: “They’re taking these little Lego characters. What they demonstrate is the Iranians have a deep understanding of Americans, whereas Americans don’t know up from down on what’s going on.”
[12:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=745s) Situations vs. Problems: The Folly of Solving Iran
Dr. Paine draws a sharp strategic distinction between a *situation* and a *problem*:
* **A Situation:** An undesirable reality that cannot be eliminated without incurring catastrophic overextension or mutual destruction.
* **A Problem:** A tactical or operational dilemma that admits of an achievable, definitive solution.
She explains that the Cold War generation recognized the Soviet Union as a lethal situation rather than an immediate problem to be solved: direct confrontation would have brought about nuclear annihilation, so leadership opted for management through containment, economic sanctions, and alliance growth. The objective was to maximize prosperity inside the free world while depressing growth in the adversary’s sphere, patiently trusting that accurate information and generational shifts would alter the balance over time at affordable costs.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Situation Versus Problem Strategic Model
accDescr: Diagram illustrating the difference in policy response between a manageable situation and a solvable problem.
subgraph SituationFramework["Situation (e.g., Soviet Union, Iran)"]
S1["Infeasible to Eradicate Directly"] --> S2["Manage via Alliances, Sanctions & Containment"]
S2 --> S3["Diminish Relative Threat Over Time at Sustainable Cost"]
end
subgraph ProblemFramework["Problem"]
P1["Clear, Feasible Objective"] --> P2["Direct Application of Power"]
P2 --> P3["Decisive Strategic Resolution"]
end
```
By contrast, Dr. Paine argues that modern American policymakers mistakenly treat Iran—a country of 90 million people—as a solvable problem through force. Drawing a historical comparison to World War II, she points out that occupying Nazi Germany (a nation of roughly 80 million people, including extended borders) required an Allied occupation force of approximately 1.5 million personnel, not counting the massive Soviet forces entering from the east. Attempting a comparable military occupation in Iran is completely infeasible.
She argues that containment, rather than regime change, was the only rational path forward:
- The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the Obama-era Iran nuclear deal) was negotiated and backed by all permanent members of the UN Security Council alongside the European Union.
- While imperfect, the deal imposed intrusive inspection mechanisms to curb uranium enrichment and kept the nuclear threat at a manageable level.
- By abandoning the agreement and pushing toward direct confrontation, the United States taught an unintended lesson to regional adversaries: “What do you suppose the lesson is for everybody now called get a nuke, right? With these wars, it's like if you don't have one, you're toast.”
[15:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=941s) Pivotal Errors and the Erosion of the Post-War Order
Defining another central theoretical model, Dr. Paine outlines what constitutes a *pivotal error*: an irreversible strategic blunder after which all available paths forward are markedly worse than the options that existed before. She illustrates this through two major geopolitical examples:
* **Vladimir Putin’s Invasion of Ukraine:** Prior to 2022, Putin had effectively seized Crimea and occupied parts of the Donbas with covert "little green men," a posture that allowed Russia to slowly destabilize Ukraine from within at modest cost. By launching a full-scale assault, Putin exhausted Russia’s vast Cold War arsenals and inadvertently galvanized Ukrainian national cohesion. Much like the American Revolution transformed thirteen squabbling British colonies into a unified nation with shared institutions, Putin’s invasion crystallized Ukraine's modern identity against Moscow.
* **The American Belligerence Toward Iran:** Abandoning diplomacy and threatening war shattered the bedrock of trust between the United States and its allies: “Sure, someone else can reassess and we'll try to restore stuff, but we will never be the trusted partner ever again. It's done.”
When asked what is fundamentally breaking down in the post–World War II era, Dr. Paine points to the collapse of international and domestic norms. She compares legal and international systems to civilian road traffic: the vast majority of motorists adhere to lane markings and stop signals voluntarily, because there will never be enough police officers to enforce order if everyone decides to ignore the rules at once. The post-war rules-based architecture functioned entirely on shared behavioral norms, such as political candidates accepting electoral defeat and congratulating their opponents rather than claiming fraud.
As the United States retreats from its historical commitments, Dr. Paine observes a historic wave of rapid European institution-building and remilitarization. European and Nordic nations, feeling an existential threat, are moving to decouple from American dependencies:
- The "Baltic 8" group (bringing together Nordic states Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, alongside Baltic states Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Iceland) is consolidating common defense and security initiatives.
- European countries are aggressively developing sovereign space infrastructure—including new spaceports across Britain, Norway, Sweden, and a launch site in the Shetland Islands—to operate independent satellite constellations.
- European consumers and markets are pursuing alternatives to American payment processors and credit card networks, accompanied by mobile applications that identify American goods to assist consumers in boycotting U.S. products.
- Canadian Prime Minister Carney is seen actively traveling to negotiate independent diplomatic and institutional arrangements to navigate this emerging era of isolationism.
[19:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1182s) The Collapse of Alliances and the Cost of Going Rogue
Dr. Sarah Paine warns that as the global landscape fractures, middle powers are stepping up to define an emerging world order while the United States risks losing its historic standing. Having stood on the right side of two world wars and built immense global goodwill, America is now charting a course that she views as profoundly destructive to its own future and that of its children. When asked how to answer critics who argue the U.S. should simply stay out of foreign entanglements like Ukraine, Paine draws a sharp line between deploying boots on the ground and smartly backing partners: “By all means, do not send combat troops all over the place, which is what we were doing in the Middle East. You position people like Ukraine to succeed. You don't have to send any troops there, but give them what they need to solve this. That is the cheap thing to do.”
By contrast, the truly expensive and destructive path is blowing up traditional alliances. Paine points out that when the U.S. threatens its partners, retaliatory consumer boycotts and supply-chain derisking directly hit American businesses. She cites Kentucky bourbon distillers who have suffered shutdowns simply because Canadian consumers stopped purchasing American liquor out of backlash. Even if a market like Canada accounts for only 5% to 10% of a company's total sales, losing that slice can completely wipe out its profit margin. Instead of remaining reliant on an unpredictable neighbor, Canada is actively arranging to sell energy directly to Europe and derisk from the United States—a self-inflicted wound stemming entirely from American threats.
[21:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1280s) Unlimited Objectives and the Continentalist Mindset
Addressing concerns over the open-ended financial commitment of supporting Ukraine, Paine reframes the conflict using the strategic distinction between limited and unlimited objectives. A limited objective might involve seizing a slice of territory or compelling diplomatic concessions, whereas an unlimited objective seeks regime change—and in its most extreme form, genocide. In her view, Vladimir Putin is pursuing an unlimited objective that mirrors historical totalitarian campaigns: he sought not only to subjugate Ukraine, but to assassinate Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his family, eliminate the government, and eradicate Ukrainian cultural figures. Paine urges constant strategic reassessment based on fresh evidence, yet her reading remains that Putin's core aim is rebuilding the former Soviet empire through raw territorial theft.
Paine contrasts this imperial ambition with Russia’s enduring economic failure. Historically a European backwater under the Tsars, Russia has struggled to produce competitive manufactured consumer goods, relying instead on raw primary commodities. She quips that even Smirnoff vodka is a British brand, illustrating that Russia has historically exported communism and misery rather than viable economic innovation. Operating as a quintessential continental empire, Moscow relies on capturing resources by force rather than generating wealth through maritime commerce:
> “What's really going on? He's a continentalist and so he wants to steal everyone else's stuff. Remember in the beginning of the Ukraine war, people were stealing washing machines. That would be a rather heavy item to steal. I mean, who would do that? someone without washing machines, right? And the Ukrainians don't want to live that way.”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Spectrum of Strategic Objectives
accDescr: Diagram illustrating the continuum from limited strategic goals down to unlimited existential objectives such as regime change and genocide.
subgraph Limited["Limited Objectives"]
L1["Diplomatic concessions / Status quo"]
L2["Border or partial territorial adjustments"]
end
subgraph Unlimited["Unlimited Objectives"]
U1["Regime change / Overthrow of government"]
U2["Elimination of culture & leadership"]
U3["Genocide / Total destruction"]
end
L1 --> L2
L2 --> U1
U1 --> U2
U2 --> U3
U3 --> DG["Forces Adversary onto 'Death Ground'"]
```
[23:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1436s) Hubris and the Principle of "Death Ground"
Russia’s initial invasion faltered because of deep-seated hubris, which Paine characterizes as a belief in an abstract, unproven superiority of the “Russian soul.” Zelenskyy recounted to Paine that invading Russian forces carried rations meant to last only 3 to 10 days, alongside dress parade uniforms meant for a quick victory march through Kyiv. Instead of capitulation, Russian armored columns encountered ordinary Ukrainian civilians throwing Molotov cocktails at their tanks. By seeking Ukraine's total erasure, Putin inadvertently triggered the ancient strategic condition of "death ground":
> “If I have an unlimited objective against you, I'm putting you on death ground. What does that mean? It means if you don't fight, I'm going to just come kill you. And so your only alternative is to fight cuz they're going to just kill you. So if you have these unlimited objectives, expect one hell of a fight and it can transform the most dysfunctional country into a lethal adversary as Hitler discovered with the Soviet Union back in the day.”
Paine observes that backing an opponent into an existential corner produces lethal resolve, just as Adolf Hitler's invasion united a brutalized Soviet populace whose officer corps had been purged by Joseph Stalin. She warns that the same dynamic applies to Iran under pressure from Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. While the previous Ayatollah opposed nuclear weapons, forcing Iran onto death ground removes incentives for restraint, virtually ensuring continuous regional sabotage. Paine expresses genuine terror at the prospect of escalation, noting that if Trump were ever to deploy a tactical nuclear weapon against Iran, it would permanently mark the United States as an international pariah.
[26:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1617s) Fuel Prices, Democratic Reassessment, and the 360-Degree Expansion
Turning to domestic fatigue over inflation and soaring prices at the pump, Paine rejects passive appeasement. To those asking how to lower gas prices, her immediate answer is straightforward: "Vote." In the United States, roughly one-third of the electorate voted for the current course, one-third voted against it, and the remaining third stayed home. She stresses that democracies rely on two-party competition because leaders like Trump rarely admit errors or reassess failed policies on their own; switching leadership through elections is the structural mechanism by which a free nation pivots away from strategic blind spots.
Paine pushes back hard against the notion, popular among some European commentators, that the West should simply allow Russia to absorb Ukraine to bring energy markets back into balance. Relying on an age-old military maxim taught at war colleges—"the enemy gets a vote"—she explains that conceding ground does not buy safety:
> “Meaning that the Russians are going to come for you whether you like it or not.”
Reviewing a conflict map tracking Russian incursions into Chechnya, Georgia (2008), Transnistria, Belarus, and Ukraine, Paine likens a continental power's strategic horizon to the round, flying-saucer dashboard of *The Jetsons*. Unlike maritime powers that view the sea as open avenues for trade, a continental ruler sits at a 360-degree dashboard of land borders, driven by an ingrained imperial habit to push outward into every neighboring territory. Surrendering Plan A to a continentalist never ends the crisis; it merely invites them to advance to Plan B.
[29:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1790s) Zelensky's Revelation and the Generational Thirst for Revenge
Looking back at modern history, Dr. Sarah Paine reflects on how the Cold War concluded on Western terms through the masterful war termination managed by George H.W. Bush and Helmut Kohl. That paved the way for an extraordinary inter-Cold War era where both China and Russia looked inward, and the United States largely adhered to established international rules rather than funding opposing sides of proxy insurgencies across the globe. By contrast, territorial war acts as a mechanism that simply torches wealth. Even if Vladimir Putin manages to hold on to parts of Ukraine, he inherits leveled, glowing ruins.
The human reality on the ground ensures the conflict will not quietly subside. The host recounts a private conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who explained why peace deals cannot simply erase the bloodshed. Zelensky described discovering a ditch left behind by retreating Russian troops containing 500 tortured, bound bodies of all ages. As the host recalls, Zelensky admitted that while it might not be diplomatic to say, he wants revenge, remarking, “If you see what I saw, you would want revenge, too.” Dr. Paine agrees that the scale of Russian atrocities is unspeakable. For decades following World War II, Germany carried the global crown of infamy, but through extensive systemic and educational reforms, modern Germans bear no responsibility for those past crimes. Today, that crown belongs to Russia, where active responsibility lies with current leadership and citizens alike.
Dr. Paine strongly rejects the Russian defense that Soviet-era crimes have nothing to do with modern Russia. While the French accept everything from the monarchies to Napoleon and all five republics as France, Russians frequently try to disown the Soviet legacy despite having run the entire enterprise. From the Romanov dynasty—where Nicholas II acknowledged being centuries behind Western Europe yet insisted on an autocratic path—to the Bolshevik desire to overthrow the capitalist order, Dr. Paine stresses that the imperial mindset remains unbroken: “The continentalists are profoundly dangerous.”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: The Cycle of Atrocity and Irreconcilable Conflict
accDescr: Diagram showing how territorial conquest leads to war crimes, trauma, and an enduring cycle of resistance.
subgraph Aggression ["Continental Imperialism"]
A["Territorial Invasions & Destruction"] --> B["Systemic Atrocities & War Crimes"]
end
subgraph Backlash ["Generational Consequence"]
B --> C["Bound & Tortured Victims"]
C --> D["Uncompromising Popular Thirst for Revenge"]
D --> E["Perpetual Insurgency & Resistance"]
end
E -->|"No off-ramp possible"| A
```
---
[32:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1932s) Continentalists and the Distortion of Truth
Continental powers operate on an archaic imperial logic, seeking to carve up Eurasia and the globe into distinct spheres of influence, guaranteeing endless border conflicts where those spheres collide. Dr. Paine categorizes Russia and China squarely as continentalist actors, but she also groups Donald Trump within this mindset due to his rhetoric claiming Canadian territory, coveting Greenland, and targeting foreign leaders like Nicolás Maduro. When the host mentions everyday citizens struggling with high fuel costs and notes Trump's claim that global wars would never happen under his watch, Dr. Paine disputes this narrative directly, attributing current oil market pressures to Trump's aggressive approach toward Iran: “Every time you load up at the pump, you have a weekly reminder that Donald Trump's war has done a number on you.”
The broader danger Dr. Paine identifies is the normalization of systemic dishonesty. While an inside trader might benefit from knowing the real facts while everyone else is misled, societies built entirely on falsehoods eventually rot from within. She illustrates this through the collapse of the Soviet planned economy. Factory and local managers, anticipating shortages and distrusting central mandates, consistently understated their existing stockpiles while wildly exaggerating their equipment needs.
When central bureaucrats in Moscow aggregated this fabricated data, the resulting economic plans severely misallocated capital and labor. Because the entire hierarchy relied on fabricated metrics, leaders were unable to identify catastrophic failures until systemic collapse had already metastasized.
---
[36:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2172s) The Mathematics of Economic Growth and the Chemotherapy of Sanctions
Dr. Paine explains the long-term danger of self-inflicted strategic errors through the mathematical rule of doubling time, calculated by dividing the natural logarithm of two by the annual growth rate:
$$\text{Doubling Time} \approx \frac{\ln(2)}{r}$$
- An economy expanding at a modest **1% per annum** requires roughly **69 to 70 years** to double in size.
- An economy growing at **3% per annum** doubles in just **23 years**.
- A seemingly small **2% differential** in growth forces a nation to wait **71 years** instead of **23 years** to double its national wealth.
When nations indulge in self-damaging policies such as imposing widespread tariffs on themselves or entering volatile wars that spike commodity prices, they shave vital points off their long-term growth trajectory. Conversely, well-coordinated multilateral sanctions target only the adversary's balance sheet. Dr. Paine compares strategic sanctions to chemotherapy: while they do not instantly remove the tumor, they systematically shrink the opponent's financial resources while allowing allied economies to continue compounding wealth together.
---
[37:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2246s) The Dictator’s Trap: Why Putin Cannot Step Down
When asked what Russian historical precedent reveals about the war in Ukraine, Dr. Paine states that Vladimir Putin has passed the point of no return: “He's just going to escalate and keep going forward.” The fatal structural flaw of dictatorships is the absence of a safe, institutional off-ramp. Democratic systems allow leaders to be peacefully voted out of office without losing their lives or their personal assets, stripping away existential terror from governance.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Democratic Transitions vs Autocratic Exit Traps
accDescr: Flowchart contrasting safe democratic handovers with the lethal stakes of autocratic leadership transitions.
subgraph Democracy ["Democratic System"]
D1["Electoral Defeat"] --> D2["Peaceful Transition"]
D2 --> D3["Safety, Pension & Normal Life"]
end
subgraph Autocracy ["Dictatorial System"]
A1["Strategic Miscalculation"] --> A2["Internal Vulnerability"]
A2 --> A3["Lethal Power Struggle or Coup"]
end
```
In Russian history, following Joseph Stalin's bloody reign of terror, the post-Stalin successor generation under Nikita Khrushchev introduced an understanding that ousted leaders would not be executed, but instead retired to a private dacha. Putin, however, has concentrated total control within a personalized protection racket, eliminating any viable retirement plan. If he ever voluntarily stepped down, members of his immediate entourage would likely eliminate him.
Although dictatorships project an outward aura of absolute invulnerability, Dr. Paine cautions that this perception is fragile: “Oh, well, that's the thing about dictatorships is they seem eternal until the day they shatter and then it's impossible to predict.” She draws a direct historical parallel to Czar Nicholas II, who entered an unnecessary recreational conflict in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–1905, igniting the internal unraveling of the Romanov dynasty despite Russia already being the largest territorial nation on Earth.
[39:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2382s) Imperial Opportunity Costs: From Nicholas II to Vladimir Putin
Dr. Sarah Paine explains that Russia sits on more natural resources than almost any nation on Earth, yet it continually suffers from the lack of a viable economic model to develop that wealth. In Russia, the absence of legal norms and property rights prevents young entrepreneurs from building businesses and keeping their earnings without being shaken down by state authorities or corrupt actors. She connects this modern dysfunction to historical precedent, using Tsar Nicholas II and the Russo-Japanese War as a case study in devastating opportunity costs. When an autocratic regime pours all its capital into fighting distant territorial wars, it starves essential domestic infrastructure:
> “So Nicholas II does that war, he loses it. But then there's another concept, opportunity cost. So if you spend all of your money fighting that war, what are you not doing? You're not building a railway system here in the western part of Russia.”
Because Nicholas II neglected domestic development, the Russian Empire entered World War I catastrophically unprepared. Troops could not be deployed efficiently, and foreign allies could not supply Russia from the outside because its primary maritime outlets—the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea—invariably bottlenecked or shut down during wartime. When food riots erupted in St. Petersburg, triggering the overthrow of the Romanov dynasty, the underlying failure was logistics; a functional railway network would have delivered bread and distributed foreign relief. Drawing the parallel directly to modern times, Dr. Paine remarks that “Vlad the Bad has done his magic here,” creating identical, compounding opportunity costs for Russia while relying on vital external life support.
[41:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2470s) Why China Backs Russia: Historical Grievances and Resource Extraction
Steven Bartlett asks why China is actively supporting Vladimir Putin rather than staying out of the conflict altogether. Dr. Paine scoffs at the idea that Beijing acts out of genuine friendship, clarifying that from the Chinese Communist Party's perspective, their primary objective is pushing the United States out of global affairs. Beyond that, Beijing harbors no sentimental warmth toward Moscow. Having written her graduate dissertation on the diplomatic history of the Russo-Chinese border, Dr. Paine stresses that Imperial Russia seized territory from the historic Chinese sphere of influence that was “greater than all of US east of Mississippi.”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Chinese Strategic Calculation Regarding Russia
accDescr: Diagram illustrating how China profits from Russia's strategic vulnerability in Ukraine.
subgraph RuVulnerability ["Russia's Strategic Blunder"]
A["Putin launches war in Ukraine"] --> B["Western sanctions choke energy exports"]
B --> C["Russia depletes conventional forces"]
end
subgraph CnStrategy ["Beijing's Predatory Extraction"]
D["Supply dual-use components for missiles"] --> E["Demand heavily discounted Russian energy"]
E --> F["Drive hard bilateral bargains"]
end
subgraph StrategicOutcome ["Long-Term Geopolitical Shift"]
C --> G["Russia loses deterrent leverage over China"]
F --> H["Severely weakened Russia subordinated to Beijing"]
G --> H
end
RuVulnerability --> CnStrategy
```
Dr. Paine points out that China remembers this lost territory vividly and benefits immensely from watching Russia bleed its own strength:
> “So if Russia's going to go weaken itself here, uh, China will benefit from this.”
Beijing supplies Russia with the components and industrial inputs needed to produce missiles and sustain its war machine, while charging for these transactions and exploiting Western energy sanctions to buy Russian oil and gas at deeply discounted rates. Historically, Moscow relied on massive nuclear arsenals and military posturing to keep China from playing tough, but Putin has squandered that deterrent capital by exhausting his forces against Ukraine. Paired with a severe, ongoing demographic collapse, Russia has made a pivotal historical error that leaves it trapped in compounding weakness. When Bartlett asks whether Russian nuclear weapons could simply flatten Ukraine, Dr. Paine cautions that maintaining nuclear warheads is technically demanding—and since Russian officials are consummate liars, their actual operational readiness is uncertain. Furthermore, both India and China have warned Moscow that deploying nuclear arms is a catastrophic line it must not cross.
[43:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2595s) The Trap of Unlimited War and the Obligation to Back Ukraine
Addressing the diplomatic stalemate, Bartlett observes that President Volodymyr Zelensky refuses to surrender an inch of Ukrainian territory, while Putin cannot afford to walk away without claiming a public victory for his domestic audience, his borders, and NATO. Dr. Paine agrees that these two positions are fundamentally irreconcilable, which is precisely the tragedy of unleashing what strategic theorists call “unlimited wars.” In World War II, the Allies achieved ultimate victory, but did so at an obscene human toll exceeding 55 million dead, including tens of millions of Soviet citizens. Relitigating border disputes through total war burns societal wealth rather than generating it:
> “It is far better to deploy your diplomats and lawyers to international institutions. Sure, the deal isn't perfect for what you wish you had gotten, but the wealth will compound if you have uh people your age to go start their businesses, have laws that allow them to do it instead of trying to poach everyone's stuff.”
She insists that Western citizens skeptical of foreign aid must understand who is bearing the true burden. Ukrainian troops are fighting on the front lines so Western democracies do not have to deploy their own sons and daughters:
> “So yeah, of course Ukraine won't give up and we should support Ukraine because they're doing the heavy lifting for all of us.”
Beyond tactical math, Dr. Paine argues that basic human values—morality, honesty, and civility—form the bedrock of international stability. A legitimate government carries two primary duties: protecting national security and fostering economic prosperity. For a country like the United Kingdom, isolated domestic survival is an illusion; British security depends on maintaining a healthy, stable Western Europe.
[45:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2726s) European Economic Strain vs. The Opportunity of Historic Crisis
Bartlett raises the domestic political headwinds facing Western leaders, noting that the war comes at an extraordinarily fragile moment for Europe's economies. Recounting his experience in France the night before, he describes walking out of his hotel to find streets set on fire by balaclava-clad rioters smashing storefronts. Turning to the United Kingdom, he quotes a grim headline from *The Sunday Times* by financial writer Jessica Beard reporting that Britain is hurtling toward bankruptcy under a £3 trillion national debt and £110 billion in annual interest payments, leaving the Chancellor of the Exchequer virtually no room to maneuver. When populations feel their own countries are crumbling, public appetite for funding foreign wars evaporates.
Dr. Paine acknowledges that Europe feels weak, but urges younger generations to study the aftermath of 1945. At the close of World War II, the European continent was leveled, millions were displaced, and every sovereign nation was drowning in debt. Yet within a single decade, that battered generation designed the institutional architecture—from collective defense pacts to unified trade frameworks—that preserved European peace for three successive generations:
> “And what's going on now is history's moving really fast. I mean, it's just it's like the log jam's busted and we don't know which way it's going to go. And it's tremendously frightening. But on the other hand, it is a tremendous opportunity to before the concrete sets again for people to get moving.”
Rather than succumbing to despair, younger generations must take advantage of this fluid historical moment before global structures harden again. Europe must overhaul its stagnant growth rates, revitalize enterprise, and streamline the suffocating regulations that hold back productivity.
[47:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2860s) Wealth Inequality: Misdiagnosing Immigration vs. Monopsony and the Tax Code
Turning to the domestic unrest inside the United States, Dr. Paine addresses the pervasive sense among young workers that opportunities have dried up and upward mobility is broken. While popular American political discourse blames unauthorized border crossings for these systemic economic woes, she argues that immigration is a scapegoat. While rules and border enforcement should be respected and enforced humanely rather than with gratuitous cruelty, the true driver of modern economic distress is the American fiscal structure:
> “Okay, that's probably a correct identification of problem. But in the United States, I suspect the answer is not immigrants. It's probably our tax code.”
Tax legislation governs how capital flows throughout a society, and the current US code has enabled a tiny cohort of individuals to accumulate billions of dollars within the span of 15 years. Alongside traditional monopoly power (controlling consumer prices), Dr. Paine highlights the less discussed concept of **monopsony**—where an employer controls such a massive share of the regional labor market that it can unilaterally dictate and depress wages.
- Ordinary Americans work 40-hour weeks or longer yet find it impossible to make ends meet because wages are systematically held down.
- Wealth is funneled upward into the coffers of roughly one thousand families in the United States who possess net worths of one billion dollars or more.
- When Bartlett asks whether the rise of mobile digital assets makes using tax codes to solve inequality harder, Dr. Paine emphasizes that the US tax code itself has actively engineered this division.
- She concludes that the country desperately needs public education on this topic: an entire podcast dedicated to reading the US tax code line by line, deconstructing its mechanics, and exposing its direct human consequences on working people.
[50:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3014s) Sponsor Break: Pipedrive and Bon Charge
Steven Bartlett opens with a statistic revealing that sales teams spend approximately 50% of their time bogged down in administrative tasks and manual CRM updates rather than actively selling, which he characterizes as fatal for their bottom line. Reflecting on his own career, Bartlett notes that this inefficiency led him to adopt Pipedrive at his previous company over a decade ago. He highlights Pipedrive's AI-driven CRM features, notably its integrated AI meeting intelligence, which prepares sales representatives before calls by compiling deal history, past communications, and email threads into a single brief. During meetings, the AI takes notes and automatically drafts CRM updates, eliminating manual data entry for the more than 100,000 businesses currently utilizing the platform. Bartlett directs listeners to a 30-day free trial requiring no credit card at pipedrive.com/ceo.
Transitioning to personal habits and simplifying routines, Bartlett cites Occam’s razor—the philosophical principle that the simplest solution is often the best. He points out how easily people overcomplicate health goals by stacking calorie trackers, electronic weights, and AI coaches, when stripped-down consistency produces superior outcomes. Connecting this philosophy to skincare, he introduces the red light face mask by Bon Charge, which utilizes targeted red and near-infrared light wavelengths to enhance skin elasticity, texture, and tone in 10 to 20 minutes a day over several weeks. Bartlett shares an exclusive 20% promotional discount for listeners via boncharge.com/doac, accompanied by free shipping and a 12-month warranty.
[52:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3143s) The U.S. Midterms and the Erosion of Democratic Norms
The conversation shifts to domestic American politics as Bartlett asks Dr. Sarah Paine to unpack the mechanics and global significance of the U.S. midterm elections. Paine explains that midterms determine the composition of the federal legislative branch: all 435 seats in the House of Representatives—who serve two-year terms—are on the ballot, alongside a staggered one-third of the six-year U.S. Senate seats and numerous state governorships. When Bartlett outlines the current political alignment—with Donald Trump backed by Republican control of the House, Senate, and Supreme Court—he asks whether the midterms will likely strip Trump of the Senate. Paine notes that while early projections favored Republicans losing the House and perhaps the Senate, polling indicates they could lose both. However, she warns that conventional polling fails when foundational institutional norms collapse, citing threats of deploying ICE agents to intimidate voters at polling stations, removing voting machines, or offering financial kickbacks for party ballots.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Midterm Electoral Staggering and Governance
accDescr: Structure of U.S. midterms showing House and Senate renewal and the barrier to bipartisan legislation.
subgraph Legislative["Legislative Branch Renewal"]
H["House of Representatives<br/>(All seats every 2 years)"]
S["U.S. Senate<br/>(Staggered seats every 6 years)"]
end
subgraph Governance["Governance Dynamics"]
P["Partisan Gridlock<br/>(Rejection of Bipartisanship)"]
EO["Executive Orders & Irreversible Facts on the Ground"]
end
Legislative -->|"Loss of Majorities"| P
P -->|"Bypassing Congress"| EO
```
Paine characterizes the upcoming vote as an existential test of the electorate’s collective reasoning. She argues that voters should recognize the direct connection between executive foreign policy blunders and the inflation hitting their wallets every time they fill their cars at the gas station. She laments that citizens have replaced core national objectives with blind partisanship, pointing out that the contemporary Republican party bears zero ideological resemblance to the party of Dwight D. Eisenhower or Ronald Reagan:
> “The Republican party today isn't remotely what it was with Eisenhower or Ronald Reagan. It's a different party. It's all about one guy.”
Paine insists that citizens should anchor their allegiance to two overarching mandates: protecting national security and promoting prosperity. By those metrics, she argues, the administration's foreign interventions have catastrophically failed on both counts. She severely criticizes congressional Republicans for dereliction of constitutional duty, specifically targeting the Senate's confirmation of Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense. She notes that while Hegseth attained the rank of major in the military, that level of experience is utterly insufficient to command the Pentagon, arguing that lawmakers should have held out for a seasoned leader in the mold of General Jim Mattis, which might have averted the conflict with Iran. When Bartlett asks whether losing majorities would force Trump to negotiate across the aisle, Paine flatly dismisses the notion, emphasizing that the administration has completely abandoned bipartisanship. Instead of passing laws, Trump relies on executive orders to create irreversible facts on the ground before the judicial system can intervene, comparing his governing style to arbitrarily clear-cutting centuries-old legacy trees on a golf course or leveling 800-year-old oaks in London’s Richmond Park:
> “He just does things and changes facts on the ground. If it later turns out to be illegal, he's already done the thing, right?”
[55:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3344s) The Democratic Core vs. Authoritarian Regimes
Bartlett asks Paine to identify the primary adversary of the Western world, wondering whether the threat is centered in China or Russia. Paine pushes back against the broad label of "the West," preferring the strategic concept of the "democratic core." She defines this core as open, rule-of-law democracies encompassing Western and Central Europe, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and historically the United States. However, she bluntly questions America’s current claim to that title when its political leadership threatens to annex Canada as a 51st state or invade Greenland:
> “I mean, we're threatening to make Canada our 51st state. Who the hell does that?”
When Bartlett inquires why Trump engages in such rhetoric, Paine responds with dry exasperation, saying she is not a psychiatrist before quipping that she studies "senile narcissists." She draws a historical and psychological parallel to Beijing's obsession with Taiwan. Despite Taiwan being roughly 1/250th the size of mainland China, Beijing views the island as an unacceptable existential challenge because its prosperous, stable self-governance dismantles the Chinese Communist Party's ethno-nationalist narrative that democracy is incompatible with Han Chinese culture:
> “If there were fair elections, Xi Jinping would no more be the head of China, nor would Vladimir Putin be the head of Russia, right? And they regard that as the existential threat.”
Paine underscores that democracies generate unrivaled compound wealth because their institutional structures foster tolerance, enforce property rights, and protect private enterprise under the law. Autocracies, by contrast, only generate wealth when they temporarily link themselves to the rules-based maritime order, as China did when opening its markets. The moment an authoritarian regime shifts to territorial conquest and military adventures, that economic engine inevitably stalls.
[58:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3495s) Historical Precedents: Tariffs, Japanese Imperialism, and Chinese Wars
Bartlett pushes back by suggesting that modern China appears to avoid foreign military entanglements. Paine refutes this assumption by tracing China's modern history, reminding him that the contemporary Chinese state was forged out of continuous, brutal warfare. Following the collapse of the Qing dynasty in 1911–1912, China plunged into the chaotic Warlord Era, where rival regional military factions fought for territorial dominance until the conflict consolidated around 1927 into a direct civil war between the Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang) and the Chinese Communist Party.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Tariffs and the Spiral into the Pacific War
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating how U.S. tariffs triggered global retaliation, Japanese resource imperialism, and the Pacific War.
subgraph Protectionism["Protectionist Shock (1930)"]
ST["Smoot-Hawley Tariffs<br/>Hoover rejects economists' warnings"]
TW["Global Trade War<br/>Retaliatory tariffs deepen Great Depression"]
end
subgraph ImperialExpansion["Japanese Imperial Reaction"]
ME["Manchurian Invasion (1931)<br/>Pursuit of autarkic resource empire"]
CA["Second Sino-Japanese War<br/>U.S. sends aid to Nationalist China"]
end
subgraph GlobalWar["Escalation to World War"]
PH["Attack on Pearl Harbor (1941)<br/>Attempt to halt U.S. aid to China"]
WW["Pacific Theater of WWII<br/>Ends 1945; Chinese Civil War ends 1949"]
end
ST --> TW
TW --> ME
ME --> CA
CA --> PH
PH --> WW
```
Paine connects these Asian conflicts directly to disastrous American economic protectionism during the Great Depression. In 1930, the original "America First" isolationists persuaded President Herbert Hoover to implement sweeping tariffs, ignoring the urgent warnings of professional economists who pleaded that trading partners would retaliate:
> “And the economists come to President Hoover and say, 'Buddy, don't do it because everyone else is going to respond in kind.' And he does it anyway. And then we're into a massive trade war, right?”
The resulting retaliatory trade barriers devastated international commerce and severely worsened the Great Depression. Resource-poor, trade-dependent nations like Japan found themselves economically isolated. Concluding that security required an autarkic empire capable of self-sufficiency, the Japanese military seized Manchuria in 1931. This expansion set the stage for Japan's eventual strike on Pearl Harbor in December 1941—launched specifically to force the United States to halt its military aid to China. Tokyo gambled that attacking Hawaii, then an unincorporated U.S. territory rather than a state (which occurred in 1959), would intimidate Washington into withdrawing from the Pacific. Instead, the United States mobilized fully, dragging the region into total war. Paine emphasizes that China endured nearly four continuous decades of catastrophic armed conflict—from the 1911 revolution through the Second World War in 1945, followed immediately by the resumed Chinese Civil War, which did not conclude until 1949.
- Following the fall of the Qing dynasty (1911–1912), China remained embroiled in active warfare for nearly 40 years until the conclusion of the Chinese Civil War in 1949.
- Herbert Hoover's 1930 tariff legislation triggered international retaliation, cutting off resource-poor economies and precipitating Japan’s 1931 invasion of Manchuria.
- Hawaii held U.S. territory status during the 1941 Pearl Harbor raid and did not attain formal American statehood until 1959.
[01:00:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3606s) The Generation That Fought Has Died
Dr. Sarah Paine surveys the relentless sequence of mid-20th-century conflicts and campaigns in China. Following the Chinese Civil War came the Korean War (1950–1953), followed by the 1962 Sino-Indian border war—where Chinese forces trounced India, an action she categorizes as a profound blunder because it turned India into a permanent enemy. Later, Deng Xiaoping mounted a brief but costly military operation against Vietnam. Domestically, Mao Zedong launched the Anti-Rightist Campaign, the Great Leap Forward—which precipitated the Great Famine as Mao exported grain for foreign currency while his population starved—and the Cultural Revolution to purge rivals and churn the system to secure his own grip on power.
After enduring such immense bloodshed and starvation, ordinary Chinese citizens wanted to step back from conflict and rest. However, Dr. Paine emphasizes a grim generational shift: the cohort of people who personally lived through and fought in those wars, and who harbored an instinctive understanding that such horrors must never be repeated, has died off. When the host asks what the world looks like if it maintains its current trajectory, Dr. Paine offers an unhesitating diagnosis: “It looks like World War II.” She returns to her core strategic concept of negative objectives—the vital duty of preventing catastrophic confrontations before they erupt—pointing out that once conflict breaks out, leaders like Donald Trump refuse to back down because they feel compelled to project victory.
[01:01:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3687s) The Failure of Mutually Assured Destruction
The host brings up a chart tracking global nuclear warhead stockpiles, arguing that living in a nuclear-armed world might enforce stability through Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), preventing a cataclysm because any escalation could exterminate life across the planet. Dr. Paine flatly rejects the idea that nuclear deterrence keeps humanity safe: “Putin has already taken that little thing and flipped it over when he is threatening NATO countries.” She points to Russian provocations, including airspace violations and drone incursions into the territorial waters of Black Sea nations like Bulgaria and Romania, warning that these actions skirt perilously close to triggering NATO’s Article 5.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Escalation Pathway from Drone Incursions to Article 5
accDescr: Flowchart illustrating how Russian threshold-testing incursions risk activating NATO Article 5 and triggering systemic conflict.
subgraph Provocations ["Threshold Testing"]
A["Russian drone incursions in Black Sea"] --> B["Airspace violations over NATO borders"]
end
subgraph NATO_Response ["Treaty Obligations"]
B --> C["Article 5 collective defense threshold"]
C --> D["Mandatory coalition engagement"]
end
subgraph Escalation ["Systemic Conflict"]
D --> E["Direct NATO-Russia military clash"]
E --> F["Nuclear escalation scenarios"]
end
```
Under Article 5, an attack on one member requires all allies to enter the war together. Dr. Paine explains that the leaders who personally remembered the destruction of World War II exercised immense care never to trigger that mutual defense clause; current leaders, by contrast, lack that visceral restraint. When asked whether a Russian invasion of Poland would inaugurate World War III, Dr. Paine responds: “Yeah.” While no one can map the exact shape of such a conflict, she notes that anyone can fire up a computer simulation, select the megatonnage of a nuclear warhead, detonate it over any major city, and witness the obscene, horrifying casualty projections.
- NATO's founding strength relied on the World War II generation's deep institutional memory to actively avoid activating Article 5 collective defense.
- Russian drones have entered territorial margins in the Black Sea around nations such as Bulgaria and Romania, testing the boundaries of European forbearance.
- The psychological insulation of modern populations and leaders from total war increases the danger that nuclear thresholds will be miscalculated.
[01:03:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3787s) Dark Personalities in Power and the Blame for Wars
Dr. Paine contends that humanity suffers from a recurring failure to recognize malevolent, antisocial leaders until catastrophe has already unfolded: “We human beings have real trouble identifying dark personalities until they become Adolf Hitler and go, 'Oh, whoops. There are concentration camps going on here.'” Most people simply cannot fathom desiring to inflict gratuitous, obscene pain on others, leaving societies blind to the danger until ruthless figures secure the levers of state power.
Regarding ongoing conflicts, Dr. Paine observes that neither Donald Trump in relation to Iran nor Vladimir Putin in Ukraine shows any willingness to retreat. She half-jokingly posits that a future U.S. Congress could theoretically solve the American dilemma by impeaching, convicting, and retiring Trump, though she cautions that anyone stepping in afterward inherits a poisoned chalice. Any successor who withdraws will do so on unfavorable terms—a trap she notes Republicans might prefer Democrats to handle so they can assign blame for the outcome. Dr. Paine lays down an enduring historical principle for evaluating such conflicts: “In fact, on wars, look for those who start them. Those are the ones you want to blame, not for those who end them.”
[01:04:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3865s) Volodymyr Zelensky as an Unprecedented Statesman
Turning to Ukraine, Dr. Paine offers an unequivocal assessment of President Volodymyr Zelensky: “He's a hero for all time.” She describes him as a truly rare statesman and a brilliant communicator who chose to stand his ground when he easily could have fled the country. The host recalls an exchange where President Biden offered Zelensky an evacuation flight, prompting Zelensky’s celebrated reply: “I want ammunition.”
Dr. Paine expresses dismay that Western commitment has wavered, emphasizing that Russia’s invasion represents one of the most transparent, unambiguous wars of imperial aggression in modern history, compounded by the sheer brutality inflicted on civilian populations. She insists that Ukraine must be fully restored to its feet while Russia is forced to stop bombing and subjected to a comprehensive strategic isolation orchestrated by regional and middle powers.
[01:05:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3952s) The Paradox of Strength and America's Imperial Overreach
When the host asks whether Europe and the wider world are pulling away from the United States, Dr. Paine responds that they are actively fleeing. She cites brazen American actions, such as seizing Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, as an object lesson in overreach: when nations realize the United States can unilaterally snatch away a head of state, their rational self-preservation instinct is to counterbalance toward Beijing as the less erratic, less lunatic alternative.
The host highlights this dynamic as a paradox of power—the moment an empire aggressively flexes and brandishes its military might, it erodes its foundational authority. By launching incursions and issuing threats across regions like Iran and Latin America, Washington has undermined its own standing and driven other nations to coalesce with one another. Dr. Paine argues that the defining clash of our era centers on world order: will global affairs be dictated by continental authoritarian regimes—where state-connected elites confiscate private businesses at will and herd ordinary citizens into front-line trenches—or by rule-of-law democracies? Democracies, she reminds the host, remain the only political systems capable of generating sustained, high per capita living standards and compounding shared wealth.
[01:07:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4052s) Billionaires, Elections, and America's Domestic Blind Spot
Dr. Paine shifts her critique to American domestic politics, expressing outrage over how the national immigration debate is framed. While public discourse obsesses over isolated violent crimes committed by undocumented immigrants, it ignores what she views as a far more dangerous phenomenon: ultra-wealthy immigrant tech moguls using their fortunes to subvert democratic institutions. Pointing specifically to Elon Musk pouring roughly $160 million into Texas politics, she asks: “He's a dysfunctional South African. What right does he have to buy our elections?”
| Category of Immigrant | Typical Public Focus | Dr. Paine's Characterization of Actual Impact |
|:--- |:--- |:--- |
| **Undocumented Migrants** | Individual violent crimes sensationalized by national media | Tragic isolated cases, but structurally non-threatening to the survival of the republic |
| **Foreign-Born Tech Billionaires** | Celebrated for technological innovation and venture capital | Funneling hundreds of millions into state elections to escape taxes and gut media regulation |
Dr. Paine stresses that she has no issue with foreign-born citizens coming to the United States or building enterprises. The danger arises when they weaponize their wealth to hollow out the democratic process to evade taxes or dodge media platform regulations designed to stem the flow of disinformation: “Americans miss it who the dangerous immigrants are. There are a handful of them and they're trying to buy our elections right now.”
When the host suggests that America as a whole has turned against Zelensky and Ukraine in recent weeks, Dr. Paine rejects the generalization: “America didn't. Donald Trump did.” She describes Trump as an avatar of serial corporate bankruptcies who uses high-priced attorneys to walk away from the wreckage he creates, leaving devastation behind while moving on unscathed. Acknowledging that Trump won public office, Dr. Paine breaks down the American electorate into thirds: one third voted for him, one third voted against him, and the final third simply refused to get off the couch.
[01:09:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4174s) Reassessing Bad Decisions and Generational Blindness to War
Dr. Sarah Paine emphasizes that when voters feel the system is failing them, they often choose radical disruptors, voting for the candidate who promises to “throw over the chessboard.” However, when that gamble produces catastrophic results, doubling down instead of learning from the mistake defies basic human growth. To illustrate, she uses a straightforward consumer analogy: if someone buys a pizza that looks delicious in the window but turns out to taste awful, they do not tell everyone it was great—they acknowledge it was lousy and warn people never to buy it. By contrast, when voters elect someone who launches an economy-tanking war, they often refuse to reassess. Turning to Steven Bartlett, she asks if he believes he already knows everything he will ever know in his life at his current age. Bartlett admits that of course he has not, and Dr. Paine agrees, remarking: “And it'd be like death in a way if this is it.” Continuous learning requires confronting past errors and realizing that earlier conclusions no longer hold.
Bartlett reflects on his own perspective as someone who has just turned 34. He explains that hearing historians describe the acute threat of a third World War clashes with the profound, sheltered stability of his upbringing. Having lived exclusively in peaceful Western democratic societies, he struggles to genuinely picture bombs falling overhead because he has never experienced devastation firsthand. Dr. Paine immediately challenges this detachment by invoking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, asking Bartlett if he would want to carry the horrific memories Zelenskyy has been forced to witness. She points out that Zelenskyy started in the exact same place as Bartlett—a civilian who had never seen war—until circumstance stripped away his ability to look away.
[01:11:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4295s) An Apology to Young People and Overcoming Information Overload
Addressing Bartlett’s concern that younger generations risk turning a blind eye to distant conflicts because of their short, orderly histories, Dr. Paine offers an earnest generational apology. She laments that her generation is handing down an unstable world rather than leaving things better for those who follow. Her counsel to young adults is grounded in fundamental civic engagement: read deeply, maintain an appetite for lifelong learning, converse across ideological silos, treat others with politeness, and fulfill the basic duty of voting. Bartlett pushes back on the overwhelming reality facing youth today, citing a relentless barrage of digital doom—simultaneous wars in Ukraine, Iran, Gaza, and the wider Middle East, the rise of artificial intelligence threatening livelihoods, and accelerating climate disasters like floods and wildfires.
Dr. Paine acknowledges the weight of these anxieties but counters with an optimistic appraisal of human nature. Having traveled and taught extensively, she argues that truly dark, destructive personality types are few in number, while the vast majority of ordinary citizens across the globe are decent and constructive. If people act constructively within their own spheres, society can endure. For her part as a retired scholar, her duty is to clarify conceptual tools that dismantle deception:
- **Disinformation**: False information deliberately constructed and weaponized by autocrats like Vladimir Putin to deceive and destabilize adversaries.
- **Misinformation**: Unwarranted claims that well-meaning people absorb and pass along without realizing they are spreading falsehoods.
> “I feel like starting on an apology uh that what my generation is leaving you is such a mess and you're supposed to make it better for the people who come after.” — Dr. Sarah Paine
[01:13:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4423s) Tactical, Operational, and Strategic Levels of War and Politics
To help citizens diagnose current events, Dr. Paine lays out the structural hierarchy that separates tactics, operations, and grand strategy. In military terms, the tactical level centers on specific hardware and micro-engagements, such as a tank’s range, armor, and vulnerabilities. The operational level links those tactical tools into cohesive campaigns and multi-phase battles designed to seize an objective, such as capturing a hill. Yet the level that truly governs outcomes is the strategic level, which asks the fundamental political question: why are we fighting in the first place? In statecraft, strategy must focus on safeguarding national security and fostering national prosperity. Failing at the strategic level renders operational victories meaningless; she cites the Vietnam War, where the United States inflicted a multiple of its own casualties upon the North Vietnamese, only to lose the war completely because the political objective collapsed and the South Vietnamese government ceased to exist.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Three Levels of Warfare and Politics
accDescr: Hierarchy showing tactical, operational, and strategic levels applied to both military and political spheres.
subgraph Strat["Strategic Level (The 'Why')"]
S1["Core Objective: National Security & Prosperity"]
S2["Measure: Long-term geopolitical survival"]
end
subgraph Oper["Operational Level (Campaigns & Process)"]
O1["Military: Campaign plans to capture key ground"]
O2["Politics: Winning elections & maintaining party power"]
end
subgraph Tact["Tactical Level (Tools & Moments)"]
T1["Military: Tank capabilities, armor & unit range"]
T2["Politics: Humiliation stunts, photo ops & election denial"]
end
Tact --> Oper
Oper --> Strat
```
Dr. Paine applies this framework directly to domestic American politics and the foreign policy of Donald Trump. Tactically, political operatives employ theater and spectacle—such as when Trump and JD Vance attempted to publically humiliate President Zelenskyy during what the Ukrainian leader anticipated would be a routine Oval Office photo opportunity, or when figures contest certified election results. Operationally, the Republican establishment fixates entirely on survival at the ballot box, calculating that breaking away from Trump would forfeit their immediate re-election prospects. By subordinating grand strategy to short-term operational expediency, Dr. Paine argues, leaders compromise the global alliance architecture that guarantees the long-term safety of future generations. In doing so, they dismantle their party's credibility and undermine national security.
> “So at the strategic level for politicians, it should be protecting our national security and promoting national prosperity.” — Dr. Sarah Paine
[01:16:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4610s) The Truth About NATO Expansion and Soviet Imperial History
When Bartlett raises the popular talking point that Russia was provoked because NATO allegedly promised not to expand eastward toward Russian borders, Dr. Paine stops him immediately. She identifies that narrative as an uncritical repetition of Vladimir Putin's core propaganda talking points. Historical records demonstrate that the United States never ran around Europe coercing sovereign nations into joining NATO against their will. On the contrary, post-communist countries across the former Soviet bloc were actively stampeding to NATO’s doorstep, desperate for admission because they understood Russian imperial ambitions from firsthand trauma.
Following World War II, Moscow systematically subjugated Eastern Europe by implanting Moscow-trained communist cadres into nations like Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria. To ensure irreversible control, the Soviets seized what historians designate as the "power ministries":
- **The Ministry of War / Defense**: Handing Moscow unilateral authority over armed forces and state violence.
- **The Ministry of the Interior / Justice**: Giving the regime direct control over the police, courts, and prison systems to decide who gets arrested and sentenced.
- **The Ministry of Information / Press**: Restricting public access to truth and monopolizing domestic media.
- **The Ministry of Agriculture**: Controlling the collectivization of land to eliminate economic independence and dictate patronage networks.
Dr. Paine notes that American generals at the time reported back to Washington in anguish, powerless to stop the Soviet Union as it carried out sweeping purges, executed opposition party figures, murdered national leaders, and sentenced political dissidents to permanent imprisonment. It was this living memory of imperial brutality, not American coercion, that drove Eastern European democracies to seek shelter under the NATO security umbrella the instant the Cold War concluded.
> “First of all, the United States didn't go around and try and stronging our arm everyone and say you must join NATO. You must join NATO. Absolutely the opposite. These folks were stampeding to NATO's doors.” — Dr. Sarah Paine
[01:18:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4736s) Why Eastern Europe Fear Russia and Chose NATO
Addressing the persistent narrative that NATO expansion provoked Russian aggression, Dr. Sarah Paine counters with the brutal historical reality that forced Eastern European countries to seek Western protection. Following World War II, the Soviet Union imposed communism across Eastern Europe. When East Germans protested in 1953, Soviet forces beat them down. In 1956, when Hungarians attempted to reform their failing communist system, the Soviets sent tanks and executed their head of state despite having promised his safety. Because Moscow has never atoned for or acknowledged these atrocities, neighboring populations remain terrified of Russian domination. Recalling her own experience living in the Soviet Union in 1988 and 1989 during the early Gorbachev era, Dr. Paine describes an economic system in total collapse. Soviet grocery stores carried roughly 77 items—fewer than a checkout candy rack in a modern Western convenience store—and the overwhelming stench of rotting meat drove shoppers away from butcher counters. Shelves offered rotting Hungarian apples (which she cooked down into applesauce) and canned Romanian tomatoes, while anything labeled *importnoe* (imported) sold instantly because domestic goods were virtually unusable.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Soviet Imperial Repression and Eastern European Security
accDescr: Historical repression by the USSR leading directly to Eastern European nations seeking NATO protection.
subgraph Repression["Historical Soviet Repression"]
A["1953: East Germany Protests"] -->|"Violently suppressed"| C["Persistent Fear of Russian Aggression"]
B["1956: Hungarian Revolution"] -->|"Tanks sent; head of state executed"| C
end
subgraph Memory["Economic Incompetence & Trauma"]
C --> D["Soviet Economic Deprivation (1988-1989)"]
D --> E["Unacknowledged Imperial Atrocities"]
end
subgraph Strategy["Geopolitical Outcome"]
E --> F["Eastern European Nations Seek NATO Protection"]
F --> G["Defensive Collective Security Border"]
end
```
Dr. Paine argues that Russia suffers from a psychological delusion where it perceives itself as a perpetual victim, playing what she terms “half-court tennis” where it believes everyone is picking on it while refusing to acknowledge its own history of invading and terrorizing neighbors. She questions why an empire spanning one-eighth of the Earth's landmass needs more territory when it cannot properly develop what it already owns, contrasting it with Scandinavian countries that turned harsh climates and difficult terrain into thriving, wealthy societies. Directing her criticism at Westerners detached from the conflict, she insists that stopping aggressors far from home is what guarantees long-term domestic safety: “Why should Ukrainians become the slaves of their murderers?” She reminds Americans that isolationism betrays the core values of the Declaration of Independence—the fundamental rights to preserve one's own life, make independent choices, and pursue happiness without foreign subjugation.
- In 1953, Soviet forces crushed workers' uprisings in East Germany.
- In 1956, the USSR invaded Hungary and executed Prime Minister Imre Nagy after violating safe-conduct guarantees.
- In 1988–1989, standard Soviet grocery stores held only around 77 discrete inventory items.
[01:23:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4983s) Diesel Surges, the Iran Conflict, and U.S. Inflation
When asked about reports that Donald Trump negotiated a deal with Vladimir Putin for Russian diesel exports after diesel climbed toward $6 per gallon, Dr. Paine dismisses the claim as pure disinformation. Russia lacks the logistical and refining capacity to export diesel in quantities large enough to move global markets. Instead, the price surge is directly linked to the conflict with Iran and the mechanics of global petroleum processing. Oil refineries are engineered to handle specific grades of crude oil to yield particular outputs like diesel; retrofitting a refinery to switch crude grades requires millions of dollars and substantial time. Blaming Ukraine for elevated fuel costs is a political scapegoat: “The diesel stuff is absolutely Trump’s war’s fault, and he’s trying to blame Ukraine. It’s despicable.”
Dr. Paine connects these geopolitical maneuvers directly to the cost of living facing everyday American families. Pointing to grocery inflation, she highlights basic staple goods like oatmeal selling for $10 a package, exacerbated by aggressive tariffs slapped on food imports from key trading partners like Mexico and Canada. She expresses profound frustration with the direction of the Republican Party, warning that reckless economic and foreign policies inflict generational harm on the United States that will outlast the political cycle.
[01:25:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5118s) Ukrainian Strategic Innovation and Europe’s "Death Ground"
Dr. Paine rejects the defeatist claim that Ukraine has no path to victory, asserting that Ukraine is actively winning by successfully defending its sovereign territory and pioneering domestic defense manufacturing. Ukrainian engineers have developed advanced drone ecosystems and are rapidly deploying indigenous ballistic missiles. While Elon Musk's decision to restrict or disable Starlink access damaged Ukrainian interceptor capabilities, Dr. Paine notes that the arbitrary use of a private kill switch delivered a severe blow to Starlink's international credibility, prompting foreign nations like India to reconsider contracts and driving up the valuation of French satellite alternatives.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: Ukrainian Domestic Production vs Industrial Mobilization Shortfalls
accDescr: Ukraine develops indigenous missile and drone capabilities while the US struggles with missile interceptor volumes.
subgraph Russia["Russian Bottlenecks"]
RU1["Up to 50% Refinery Capacity Damaged"]
RU2["Inability to Replace Western Tech Components"]
UA3 --> RU1
RU1 --> RU2
end
subgraph West["Western Industrial Contrast"]
US1["High Unit Cost Patriot Interceptors"]
US2["Severe Interceptor Shortages"]
FDR["FDR WWII Model: High Volume Over Unit Margin"]
US1 --> US2
FDR -.->|"Historical Alternative"| US1
end
```
Ukraine has executed deep-strike campaigns entirely independent of Western satellite networks, targeting critical nodes inside the Russian Federation, including tech hubs like Yandex and vital oil infrastructure. Striking Russian refineries has disabled up to 50 percent of their operating capacity—losses Russia struggles to repair due to its reliance on embargoed Western technology. Dr. Paine criticizes the contemporary U.S. defense industrial base for price gouging and failing to mass-produce Patriot missile interceptors, contrasting it with Franklin D. Roosevelt's World War II industrial mobilization, where FDR assembled business executives and demanded tens of thousands of airplanes, pivoting manufacturing profits from unit margins to massive volume. Finally, she dismisses the fear that European support for Kyiv will dry up. European leaders understand that if Ukraine falls, Russian forces will advance further west, placing the entire continent on existential "death ground." As Dr. Paine bluntly summarizes Moscow's war effort: “There’s tremendous disinformation that good old Vlad the Bad is putting out to get people thinking that he’s winning. He’s not. He’s wrecking his country.”
[01:28:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5321s) The Toll on Russia's Soldiers, Demographics, and Economy
Dr. Sarah Paine considers whether Vladimir Putin could be removed by his own inner circle, remarking that while it is conceivable his friends might put something lethal in his breakfast, it is probably unlikely. At 74 years old, he is living under staggering pressure, which she notes is the entirely wrong age for such stress. A far more acute vulnerability lies on the battlefield itself: at what point do the young men on the front lines riot, turn their weapons around, and target their commanders? When the host recalls that Russia nearly witnessed this exact breakdown with Yevgeny Prigozhin and the Wagner Group rebellion, Dr. Paine agrees. She highlights a fundamental demographic vulnerability of modern Russia: unlike Joseph Stalin's era before modern birth control, when large families were the norm, today’s Russian recruits are predominantly only children. They represent precious, irreplaceable sons whose loss risks triggering open defiance from Russian mothers.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Internal Pressures Threatening Russian War Effort
accDescr: Diagram showing demographic, economic, and frontline strains driving systemic instability in Russia.
subgraph Frontline ["Frontline & Demographics"]
A["Frontline Exhaustion & Mutiny Risk"] --> C["Domestic Breaking Point"]
B["Loss of Only Children (Demographic Void)"] --> C
end
subgraph Economic ["War Footing & Economic Drain"]
D["40% of Budget on Defense"] --> E["Labor Shortages & >20% Interest Rates"]
F["Drone Strikes on Refineries (-50% Capacity)"] --> E
G["$300B Reserves Frozen & Lost EU Gas"] --> E
end
C & E --> H["Unsustainable War Footing"]
```
Meanwhile, Russia's shift to a high-risk war economy is draining the nation's future. Massive defense expenditures now consume roughly 40 percent of the national budget, artificially elevating gross domestic product figures while stripping resources away from civil infrastructure, healthcare, and education. Acute labor shortages—caused by military mobilizations and the exodus of hundreds of thousands of skilled professionals—have unleashed persistent inflation, compelling the Central Bank of Russia to push interest rates above 20 percent. Compounding these domestic pressures, Russia has lost its primary European energy export market, seen $300 billion in sovereign reserves frozen by Western sanctions, and suffered long-range Ukrainian drone strikes that have knocked out up to 50 percent of its domestic oil refinery capacity. Evaluating these structural crises, Dr. Paine questions how anyone could characterize this as a success: “So that's called winning a war? I don't think so.”
[01:30:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5432s) The Continentalist Threat, Trump, and the Messy Strength of Democracy
The host points out that Russia cannot sustain this level of systemic economic and social strain indefinitely. Dr. Paine agrees, but emphasizes that as long as Vladimir Putin draws breath, he will persist, and his inner circle seems prepared to go down with the ship. She suggests that the only realistic off-ramp would require Western intelligence and diplomats to quietly offer his subordinates guaranteed safe passage and whatever billions they require in exchange for orchestrating a viable retirement plan for Putin. When asked directly to identify who the true enemy is in today's global conflicts, Dr. Paine does not hesitate: the enemy is the continentalists—primarily China and Russia, though she warns that continentalist territorial impulses are even seeping into American politics. She points to Donald Trump floating the idea of taking over Canada: “It's either a really bad joke, which I don't think it is, or it's actually where Donald Trump lives.”
Dr. Paine underscores that the American political system faces severe democratic friction when parties fail to hold their leaders accountable for such rhetoric. Yet she turns to the famous observation often attributed to Winston Churchill: “Democracy is the worst system of government except for all the alternatives, right?” Authoritarian leaders like Xi Jinping look across the ocean and conclude that their centralized regimes are superior because they project an image of calm order compared to the messy, constant arguments of Western democracy. In reality, Dr. Paine argues, dictatorships simply double down on disastrous choices because no one can challenge them, digging themselves into deeper holes over time while their youth grow increasingly disillusioned. A vibrant multi-party system that accepts election results, encourages competitive lawmaking, and constantly refines fair rules remains vastly superior to any authoritarian monopoly.
[01:32:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5536s) Russia After Putin: A Mafia Free-for-All and the Broken Budapest Memorandum
When asked whether Russia could transition to a democratic leader once Putin departs, Dr. Paine dismisses the possibility of any near-term democratic shift. The broader reality, she argues, is that everyday Russians largely support the war; while citizens lament the steep economic costs and grieve over losing their sons in Ukraine, one rarely encounters Russians who fundamentally oppose the premise that Moscow has a historical right to own Ukraine. Nor is there any institutional framework in place to conduct legitimate democratic elections. Genuine democracy requires robust, independent electoral machinery to ensure votes are counted accurately—institutions that even the United States is struggling to protect—whereas modern Russia possesses only sophisticated systems for rigging and doctoring electoral outcomes.
Instead of a constitutional succession, Dr. Paine predicts that Putin's death will trigger a violent, unpredictable scramble for control:
> “Think of him like a family tree. There's Vlad the Bad up top or like he's sort of like a mafia don and then he has his consiglieri underneath them, right? And then they've got their consiglieri underneath them. And so, there's this whole network. So, when he dies, he's gone. And then it's which one of these guys or is it someone from over here who's going to take over? And you know what? They don't know either, right? And it's a massive free-for-all.”
She notes that Russia is now filled with heavily armed, combat-experienced men who will inevitably divide their loyalties among competing oligarchic and security factions, raising the specter of internal civil conflict and profound instability that could take a decade to stabilize. Western democratic powers, she warns, must assemble contingency war plans on the shelf today so they are not caught flat-footed when the regime inevitably shatters. A major catastrophic risk is the reappearance of loose nuclear weapons, echoing the collapse of the Soviet Union. She laments that Ukraine surrendered its Soviet-era nuclear stockpile under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum precisely because the West promised protection—a pledge the West broke. Dr. Paine notes that when a global superpower's security guarantees prove worthless, it destroys all future strategic leverage, leaving leaders like Donald Trump with zero credibility or influence over Kyiv.
- **Mafia-Style Hierarchy:** Kremlin power operates via personalized patron-client chains under Putin rather than formal state institutions, guaranteeing structural paralysis upon his death.
- **Trained Fighters:** The influx of hundreds of thousands of mobilized, battle-hardened Russian veterans introduces an unprecedented armed wildcard into any future post-Putin succession war.
- **The "Humpty Dumpty" Dynamic:** Reassembling Russian centralized governance after a dictatorial rupture could take at least 10 years of unpredictable domestic turmoil.
- **Broken Strategic Promises:** Defaulting on security guarantees given to Ukraine when it denuclearized permanently damages American deterrent credibility on the international stage.
[01:35:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5725s) Maritime Positive-Sum Wealth vs. Continental Destruction
Dr. Paine reiterates that effective global strategies are fundamentally built on win-win principles where every participant secures tangible benefits. This reciprocal foundation explains the enduring resilience of the maritime order: when everyone prospers through open commercial access, nations cooperate naturally, as demonstrated by European allies continuously pooling resources to assist Ukraine. In contrast, territorial continental wars represent a catastrophic negative-sum enterprise that burns wealth and human capital at an astonishing velocity.
The maritime framework constitutes the only true infinite, positive-sum game in world history. Dr. Paine emphasizes that roughly 90 percent of global trade moves across the oceans, making the maritime commons the planet's foundational logistical network. A modern container ship can effortlessly transport 21,000 shipping containers across the globe, whereas an overland freight train can haul perhaps 600 containers under ideal conditions. For all their flaws, multilateral international institutions remain the only viable mechanism humanity has invented to preserve open sea lanes and prevent great-power war. She argues that if existing bodies like the United Nations prove impossible to reform, democratic nations should construct parallel institutions and migrate their diplomatic energy and resources there rather than abandoning multilateralism altogether.
[01:36:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5819s) Xi Jinping's Fear of Soviet Collapse and the Uyghur Genocide
Turning to overlooked global crises, Dr. Paine addresses the systematic atrocities committed against the Uyghurs in Xinjiang. She traces Chinese Communist Party policy directly back to Xi Jinping’s ascension to power in 2012. By 2013, terrified of suffering the same fate as the Soviet Union, Xi convened China's top Sovietologists and demanded to know why Moscow had collapsed:
> “And what they told him is that the Soviet Union had been organized on the basis of ethnicity. And what the Russians had always had a Russian who ran each of these places and the ministries and things within them, but then the number two would be the token number two. And then they would sponsor all kinds of dictionaries and the Uzbek language and you could do your folk dances and your embroidery and all that stuff. And while the Soviet Union was holding it together, it looked great. But when it shattered, it meant it was really easy for it to shatter on these ethnic lines.”
Determined to prevent China from fracturing along similar cultural and regional fault lines, Xi initiated a ruthless campaign of cultural genocide against Muslim minorities in Xinjiang. Dr. Paine explains that the state rounded up Uyghur men into concentration camps and separated children from their families, herding them into state-run boarding schools designed to erase their indigenous heritage and religious identity. She draws a somber historical parallel between Beijing's forced assimilation programs and the dark history of the United States forcibly placing Native American children into boarding schools to strip away their language and cultural identity.
[01:38:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5894s) Assimilation Policies and Dr. Paine's Lectures
Dr. Sarah Paine concludes her thoughts on coercive demographic engineering and assimilation programs, drawing a sharp parallel to historical practices where marginalized groups were assimilated against their will. She remarks that children are being raised to become “honorary Han,” while women are funneled into forced marriages or trafficking driven by China's severe shortage of women of childbearing age: “You're bringing them up to be like honorary white people. And so they're bringing up these kids to be honorary Han.”
Turning to her broader scholarship, the host praises Dr. Paine's extensive body of work, displaying several of her books and encouraging listeners to seek out her full-length academic lectures. When the host initially suggests there are 14 lectures available online, Dr. Paine gently corrects him, explaining the precise structure of her official online series:
- The core syllabus is titled the *Sarah Paine Lecture Series*, marked with distinct cover logos.
- The numbering starts at zero, proceeds through one to seven, and concludes with a finale.
- In total, there are nine lectures in the complete official set, though other third-party recordings also circulate online.
[01:39:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5942s) Cold War Origins of Dr. Paine's Lifelong Studies
Reflecting on Dr. Paine's background, the host asks how it feels to have dedicated an entire career to Russian and Chinese imperial history at a time when these very topics have resurged to dominate modern global headlines. Dr. Paine recalls making the deliberate choice when she was younger than the host to dedicate her life to mastering both countries, knowing full well it would demand decades of rigorous study.
When asked what sparked that ambition, Dr. Paine points directly to her birth year of 1957. That was the year the Soviet Union launched Sputnik 2, putting the dog Laika into orbit on a one-way trip and triggering profound dread across the United States over the sudden reality of intercontinental ballistic missiles. Growing up during what many consider the absolute height of the Cold War—surrounded by rhetoric of the Soviet Union as an existential adversary—and subsequently witnessing the tragedy of the Vietnam War unfold on television, she was compelled to seek out a deeper, structural understanding of international conflict. As Dr. Paine recalls: “So that's the year I'm born. And I grew up where everyone's talking about Russia being the evil empire and curious about that and growing up as a little kid during the Vietnam War and then watching that unfold poorly and I thought, well, I want to learn more about this.”
[01:40:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=6012s) The Closing Question: Sorrow, Children, and Political Duty
The conversation shifts to the podcast's signature closing ritual, where the preceding guest writes an anonymous question for the next interviewee. The host poses the unprompted question to Dr. Paine: “What makes you emotional?”
Dr. Paine answers after a quiet pause, identifying sorrow as the emotion that cuts deepest—specifically witnessing unneeded human misery: “Watching sorrow. Watching other people suffering, watching children suffering. Why should they?” She delivers an impassioned critique of modern political complacency, directly challenging lawmakers to stop obsessing over election cycles and grifting at the expense of those who inherit the consequences. Pointing to the moral obligation leaders have toward upcoming generations, she insists that statesmen must accept political defeat if that is what doing the right thing requires: “So you lose the next election. Do the right thing. It's past due. Don't support continentalists.” For Dr. Paine, protecting the rules-based order and shielding future generations from catastrophic continental conflict overrides every short-term partisan calculation: “What is more important than the generations that follow? Nothing.”
## Notable quotes
> [37:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2246s) Oh, well, that's the thing about dictatorships is they seem eternal until the day they shatter and then it's impossible to predict. — Dr. Sarah Paine
> [23:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1436s) If I have an unlimited objective against you, I'm putting you on death ground. What does that mean? It means if you don't fight, I'm going to just come kill you. — Dr. Sarah Paine
> [43:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2595s) It is far better to deploy your diplomats and lawyers to international institutions. Sure, the deal isn't perfect for what you wish you had gotten, but the wealth will compound — Dr. Sarah Paine
> [04:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=274s) And so governments don't actually get credit for what they do because on a normal day it's normal. — Dr. Sarah Paine
## Mentioned
Adolf Hitler, Baltic 8, Benjamin Netanyahu, Bon Charge, Budapest Memorandum, Central Bank of Russia, Chinese Communist Party, Declaration of Independence, Deng Xiaoping, Department of Defense, Donald Trump, Dr. Sarah Paine, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Elon Musk, Franklin D. Roosevelt, George H.W. Bush, Helmut Kohl, Herbert Hoover, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Imre Nagy, JD Vance, James Mattis, Jessica Beard, Jim Mattis, Joe Biden, Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Joseph Stalin, Kuomintang, Laika, Lego, Mao Zedong, Mark Carney, Mikhail Gorbachev, NATO, Nicholas II, Nicolás Maduro, Nikita Khrushchev, Patriot missile system, Pete Hegseth, Pipedrive, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Paine Lecture Series, Smirnoff, Sputnik 2, Starlink, Steven Bartlett, The Jetsons, The Sunday Times, U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, U.S. Supreme Court, United Nations, United States Fifth Fleet, Vladimir Putin, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Wagner Group, Winston Churchill, Xi Jinping, Yandex, Yevgeny Prigozhin
## Video description
Are escalating geopolitical tensions hurtling humanity towards World War III? Dr. Sarah Paine highlights the historical roots of geopolitical conflicts and demonstrates how shifting away from a rules-based maritime order guarantees economic collapse.
Dr. Sarah Paine is a renowned geopolitical strategist, historian, and retired professor from the U.S. Naval War College, specializing in Russian and Chinese imperial history and maritime strategy. She applies historical models such as the Peloponnesian War and World War II to decode the actions of leaders like Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping.
*In this episode, she explains:*
■ *The Maritime vs. Continental Divide:* How the world is split between maritime powers compounding wealth through free trade and continental empires burning wealth through territorial conquest.
■ *The Cost of Isolationism:* Why sudden, aggressive tariffs and the abandonment of key international alliances rapidly accelerate inflation, shrink global influence, and destabilize the U.S. economy.
■ *The Death Ground Principle:* How threatening an adversary's very existence removes all their strategic alternatives, transforming struggling nations into highly lethal, unyielding military opponents.
■ *The Illusion of Dictatorial Stability:* Why the lack of a peaceful transition of power in dictatorships guarantees that the death of a leader like Putin will trigger profound, unpredictable instability and violent internal power struggles.
■ *The Power of Negative Objectives:* Why a government's most vital job goes completely unnoticed, focusing on preventing catastrophic disasters before they happen rather than chasing highly publicized achievements.
00:00:00 Intro
00:02:01 How Did the World Get So Close to World War III?
00:04:59 Was the Iran War a Catastrophic Mistake?
00:07:01 Where the Trump Administration Went Wrong
00:09:12 Putin's Biggest Mistake in the Russia-Ukraine War
00:17:15 Should America Stop Fighting Other Countries' Wars?
00:20:07 Why Americans Are Tired of Paying for Foreign Wars
00:21:12 The Deadly Military Strategy of Death Ground
00:24:45 How Rising Gas Prices Could Affect Your Future
00:26:57 Will Ukraine Seek Revenge Against Russia?
00:30:48 What Happens Next in Putin's Russia?
00:37:26 What Would Happen if Putin Stepped Down?
00:40:15 The Real Reason China Is Backing Russia
00:41:18 What Would It Take to End the War in Ukraine?
00:43:15 Why Europe's Economy Is Under Pressure
00:45:26 How the US Tax System Shapes America's Future
00:50:15 Why the US Midterm Elections Could Change Everything
00:50:24 Ads
00:52:23 What's Happening to the Democratic Party's Core Voters?
00:55:44 What Happens to the World if Nothing Changes?
01:01:54 How Will History Remember Volodymyr Zelensky?
01:04:28 Why the World May Be Turning Away From America
01:05:55 Why People Unaffected by War Should Pay Attention
01:10:34 The 3 Levels of Warfare That Shape Every Conflict
01:13:46 Is NATO Expansion Really Threatening Russia?
01:17:30 What Would a Trump-Putin Deal Mean for Ukraine?
01:23:40 Can Ukraine Actually Defeat Russia?
01:25:49 Who Is the Real Enemy in Today's Global Conflicts?
01:32:04 Could Russia Ever Become a True Democracy?
01:32:50 What Happens to Russia After Putin Dies?
01:34:03 The Global Crises We Can't Afford to Ignore
*Follow Dr. Sarah Paine:*
Website - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/rO7WS9
_•Articles_
_•Lecture series_
_•Research Contributions_
_•Publications_
Books
_The Japanese Empire: Grand Strategy from the Meiji Restoration to the Pacific War_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/GXnzc4Q
_The Wars for Asia, 1911–1949_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/69v4VIT
_The Sino-Japanese War of 1894–1895: Perceptions, Power, and Primacy_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/1RVXdGi
_Imperial Rivals: China, Russia, and Their Disputed Frontier, 1858–1924_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/9ZCr1CC
Edited Books
_The Routledge Handbook of the Second World War in the Pacific_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/8lf26P1
_The Strategy of Sanctions: From Antiquity to the 21st Century (free download)_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/7u2V1tu
_Deterrence and Denial: The Power of Fleets in Being_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/AMFaHy9
_Nation Building, State Building and Economic Development_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/6NGx1Y3
*The Diary Of A CEO:*
◼ Join DOAC circle here - https://doaccircle.com/
◼ Buy The Diary Of A CEO book here - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/BWjLTZK
◼ Shop The Diary Of A CEO collection: https://thediary.com/collections/shop
◼ Get email updates - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/5IB1H6E
◼ Follow Steven - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/AGU9QP4
◼ DOAC Bookshelf - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/BBnuCf6
*Sponsors:*
Pipedrive - https://pipedrive.com/CEO
Bon Charge: https://boncharge.com/DOAC for 20% off
Function Health - https://functionhealth.com/DOAC
Historian Dr. Sarah Paine argues that contemporary global instability stems from an escalating clash between the maritime rules-based order and predatory continental empires, compounded by leaders who pursue unlimited wars and normalize deception. She warns that unchecked continentalist aggression, alliance erosion, and short-sighted domestic governance risk repeating the systemic catastrophes of the mid-twentieth century.
Maritime Wealth versus Continental Conquest (2:01)
Paine frames modern geopolitical conflict around a fundamental structural divide: the maritime order versus continental land empires. In her assessment, continental powers such as Russia and China treat physical territory as the primary currency of power. This imperial approach relies on seizing land by force, which incinerates wealth through destruction, long-term garrisoning, and endless border clashes. Historically, this model has failed to develop competitive domestic manufacturing, leaving regimes reliant on primary commodity extraction and territorial expansion.
In contrast, the maritime rules-based model pioneered by Great Britain compounds wealth through open industry, unimpeded sea lanes, and international commercial law. This architecture provides predictable standards, protecting foreign assets and enabling international commerce without the overhead of territorial annexation. Paine argues that by adopting coercive, transactional foreign policies, Western actors risk destroying the institutional trust that underpins this compounded prosperity.
Negative Objectives and the Strategic Trap of Unlimited War (4:34)
A recurring flaw in modern statecraft, according to Paine, is confusing positive objectives—visible actions such as capturing a foreign leader—with negative objectives, which center on deterrence and disaster prevention. Because successful prevention leaves behind no visible crisis, societies routinely undervalue the military and diplomatic investments required to preserve peace. Paine contends that competent governance primarily functions through negative objectives, such as deterring foreign aggression and regulating domestic infrastructure.
Paine notes that mismanaging this distinction leads to strategic overreach, particularly when states attempt to resolve permanent situations rather than solve tactical problems. By pursuing unlimited objectives—such as seeking regime change or territorial erasure—aggressors back their adversaries into existential "death ground." In Ukraine, Russia's initial objective to assassinate leadership and annex territory unified Ukrainian resistance into a lethal adversary, transforming what Moscow planned as a swift parade into an exhausting, wealth-destroying war of attrition.
Systemic Strains inside Russia and Beijing's Calculation (37:26)
Paine argues that Vladimir Putin has trapped himself in an autocratic cul-de-sac with no institutional off-ramp, as voluntary retirement is precluded by personalized patron-client networks. Beyond immediate battlefield losses, modern Russia suffers from acute demographic vulnerability: unlike during World War II, modern recruits are frequently only children, heightening the domestic risk of mutiny or civil defiance. Furthermore, historical neglect of domestic logistics and civilian infrastructure mirrors the fatal opportunity costs that triggered the collapse of the Romanov dynasty during the Russo-Japanese War and World War I.
Paine dismisses the idea of a genuine ideological partnership between Moscow and Beijing. China's backing of Russia is transactional, aimed at expelling the United States from global influence while extracting heavily discounted Russian energy and resources. Xi Jinping's domestic posture, including the repressive assimilation campaigns and boarding school networks in Xinjiang, is driven by an acute fear of repeating the Soviet Union's ethnic collapse, rather than sentimental solidarity with Moscow.
Alliance Deterioration, Domestic Distraction, and Deterrence Breakdown (19:42)
Paine identifies Western political trends as major liabilities for global stability. She criticizes aggressive American interventions, such as unilateral conflict with Iran and threats against allies, for fracturing critical maritime coalitions and choking commercial choke points like the Strait of Hormuz. These actions trigger retaliatory economic boycotts that harm domestic producers and drive third-party states to seek balance through Beijing. Paine also rejects claims that nuclear deterrence or Mutually Assured Destruction automatically guarantees safety, citing Russian drone incursions and threshold testing near NATO borders as dangerous escalation risks.
Domestically, Paine argues that Western societies misdiagnose their core economic frustrations. Blaming immigration distracts from structural distortions in the tax code and employer monopsony power, which depress wages while concentrating capital among a tiny elite. Compounding this vulnerability is a generational amnesia: the cohort that experienced the catastrophic realities of World War II and the Chinese civil wars has largely died off, leaving contemporary publics and leaders blind to how rapidly localized disruptions can spiral into a third global conflict.
Paine concludes that avoiding a systemic global war requires democratic leaders to prioritize long-term negative objectives over immediate electoral gains. However, an unresolved question remains whether Western democracies possess the domestic cohesion, institutional trust, and patience necessary to sustain deterrence against continental powers when publics face severe cost-of-living pressures and pervasive political polarization.
## Background
该视频由 YouTube 频道《The Diary Of A CEO》于 2026 年 10 月 29 日发布。节目邀请了著名地缘战略学家、历史学家及美国海军战争学院退休教授萨拉·佩因博士（Dr. Sarah Paine），深入探讨日益升级的地缘政治危机、第三次世界大战的潜在威胁，以及背离基于规则的海洋世界秩序所带来的全球经济崩溃风险。
## TL;DR
佩因博士通过对比依靠商业与规则让财富实现复利增长的“海洋秩序”与依靠武力侵占土地、挥霍财富的“大陆帝国主义”，系统剖析了当前的俄乌冲突与中东战事。她严厉抨击了美俄领导层的一连串关键战略失误，指出美国对伊朗的鲁莽干预和孤立主义关税正在摧毁本国经济并瓦解盟友体系，而普京发动的全面侵乌战争则因施加了政权更迭式的“无限目标”，将乌克兰逼入决一死战的“死地”。她强调政府的首要职责是追求“防止灾难发生”的负面目标，并呼吁公众坚守常识与民主投票权，以应对独裁扩张与虚假信息带来的空前危机。
## Atmosphere & style
整场对话气氛凝重、深沉且极具末日预警的压迫感，历史学者的宏大格局与现实政治的危机感交织在一起。佩因博士的叙述犀利坦率、毫无学术官腔，不仅频繁使用生动鲜明的隐喻剖析大国博弈，更带着对历史覆辙的痛心与对政客短视的愤怒。主持人与嘉宾之间的交流层层递进，从残酷的地缘算计逐步升华至对无辜孩童受难的悲悯，让观众在强烈的震撼与警醒中感受到直面时代动荡的精神洗礼。
## Bulletin
- [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=0s) 萨拉·佩因（Dr. Sarah Paine）警告当前地缘对抗正滑向二战前夕的危险境地，指出大国对伊与对乌政策严重破坏了以规则为基础的海洋世界秩序，并正加速诱发不可控的全球核扩散。
- [01:28:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5321s) 俄罗斯已转向高风险战时经济，国防支出占据总预算约40%，基准利率被推高至20%以上，且乌克兰的精准打击已使其在役炼油产能损失近50%。
- [01:23:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4983s) 佩因批驳了所谓俄美达成柴油进口协议的说法，强调俄罗斯缺乏有效出口产能，全美柴油飙升至每加仑6美元的根源在于对伊军事冒进与炼油规格错配。
- [17:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1035s) 美国孤立主义与关税单边主义正迫使欧洲加速在防务协作、自主航天星座及独立支付系统上推进“去美国化”制度建设。
## Key takeaways
- [02:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=121s) 大陆型帝国与海洋世界秩序的核心冲突：大陆主义视土地为权力硬通货，其武力征服本质上是燃烧财富；海洋秩序则依赖规则与自由贸易实现财富的复利积累。
- [05:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=308s) 负面目标是国家治理的核心职能：威慑与秩序的成效体现为“防止灾难发生”，虽因缺乏直观可量化的政绩而常被忽视，但放弃威慑将直接诱发系统性崩溃。
- [07:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=421s) 伊朗战事暴露战略盲区：开战前未评估波斯湾易被封锁的地缘现实与盟友反应，造成供应链断裂与经济反噬，属灾难性的重大误判。
- [15:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=941s) “关键错误”的不可逆性：一旦迈出战略错步，所有原有优质选项归零；普京全面入侵乌克兰耗尽其冷战常规武器库，并不可逆地凝聚了乌克兰的现代国家认同。
- [21:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1272s) 无限目标将对手推入“战略死地”：普京与极端鹰派追求政权更迭与文化消灭的无限目标，剥夺了对方的妥协空间，反倒将对手淬炼为拼死抵抗的致命宿敌。
- [26:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1617s) 大陆强权的无休止扩张冲动：俄罗斯的安全观建立在360度向外扩张吞并缓冲区的惯性之上，妥协与退让绝不可能换来其扩张步伐的停歇。
- [33:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1988s) 谎言常态化对体制的侵蚀：以苏联中央计划经济的数据造假导致资源错配内爆为例，虚假政治叙事与谎言常态化终将瓦解国家的决策根基。
- [37:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2246s) 独裁政权的体制死局：民主体制以和平去职消除权力交接的生死恐惧，而普京等独裁者依靠黑帮式庇护网络统治，缺乏安全退休的“下坡路”，一旦失权往往伴随剧烈动荡。
- [41:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2470s) 中俄博弈的现实算计：中国在借俄乌战事获取廉价能源并主导贸易定价的同时，客观上也借制裁对俄罗斯国力形成长期的消耗与削弱。
- [45:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2726s) 美国国内危机根源在于税法与买方垄断：将底层困境归咎于外来移民掩盖了真实矛盾，真正加剧社会撕裂的是导致财富向极少数寡头集中的税收法典及劳动力买方垄断。
- [55:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3344s) 独裁者对民主核心的生存恐惧：台湾与西方民主制度的存在直接戳破了“威权统治契合特定文化”的谎言，独裁政权因无法通过公平选举维系合法性而将民主视为生存威胁。
- [01:13:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4426s) 战争与政治的三个层级：必须区分战术细节、战役操作与战略全局；政客为眼前选举席位迎合民粹或军队沉迷战损比，若违背国家长远安全与繁荣的战略目标，均属舍本逐末。
- [01:17:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4626s) 澄清北约东扩历史真相：冷战后并非美国强行推行北约东扩，而是亲历过苏联大清洗与极权统治的东欧国家主动奔向北约大门寻求安全庇护。
- [01:32:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5536s) 后普京时代的权力真空隐患：俄罗斯民众并非反对扩张而是厌恶战败代价；普京身故后极可能引发各路军事集团的残酷内斗，西方需严密防范散落核武风险。
- [01:40:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=6012s) 对政治家历史责任的呼吁：政治决策者应跳出政党短视利益与政治敛财，宁可冒着输掉选举的风险也要坚决遏制陆权霸权扩张，捍卫后代生存繁荣的根基。
## Detailed walkthrough
### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=0s) 走向第三次世界大战的悬崖与谎言的代价
访谈在一阵沉重的预警中拉开序幕：当前世界局势的发展轨迹与第二次世界大战爆发前夕惊人地相似，人类正以极具危险的速度滑向全面冲突的深渊。萨拉·佩因（Dr. Sarah Paine）直言不讳地指出，战争一旦开打，要停下来就千难万难。然而，眼下统领着全球多个重要大国的决策者却极其鲁莽轻浮，并且无休止地用谎言粉饰太平。谎言常态化是毁灭性的病毒——正如当年庞大的苏联走向解体，最核心的原因之一便是它建立在虚妄的谎言基石之上。
佩因教授用生动的比喻描绘了当下地缘政治秩序的崩裂：“历史正在飞速演进，就像浮木堵塞的河道突然被冲开，我们根本不知道它会冲向何方，这极其令人恐惧。”她列举了接连发生的灾难性决策：普京通过入侵乌克兰掀翻了整个地缘棋盘；唐纳德·特朗普则卷入了一场对伊朗的“消遣性战争”（recreational war）。这场对伊冲突严重重创了美国经济，瓦解了美国的同盟体系，更带来了击垮全球经济的连带破坏。佩因强调，像普京这样拥有阴暗人格的领导人根本不在乎死伤多少人，而这类掌权者在历史和战略维度上完全是不合格的。当主持人提及特朗普曾声称与普京达成柴油出口协议时，佩因直接斥之为假消息，指出俄罗斯根本没有足够的产能出口柴油来产生实质性影响，“像往常一样，他又在撒谎”。双方谁也不愿在乌克兰或伊朗退缩，这场冲突面临永远僵持消耗的危险。
- 普京发动的乌克兰战争打破了既有的国际博弈框架，彻底颠覆了冷战后的安全构架。
- 美伊战端严重打击了国际供应链与能源安全，导致美国从盟友依赖的支柱异化为威胁全球经济稳定的主因。
- 俄罗斯的炼油与柴油出口能力在遭受各方制约后极其有限，所谓大规模向美出口柴油以平抑油价在现实产能上完全不成立。
---
### [02:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=121s) 权力的硬通货演变：大陆征服与海洋秩序的对决
面对全球各处烽烟四起、巴黎街头暴乱与秩序失控的乱象，主持人询问这一切究竟始于何处，倒下的第一张多米诺骨牌又是什么。佩因指出，历史并非截然切割的片段，而是一条长期的连续统。要理解当下的混乱，必须掌握两个根本性的组织范式：**大陆型帝国（Continentalism）**与**海洋世界秩序（Maritime World Order）**。
在漫长的人类历史中，国家多以大陆帝国形态组织，其权力的硬通货是“土地”。大陆主义的核心逻辑就是抢夺他人的领土；但在现代经济学意义上，掠夺土地的行径本质上是在“燃烧与挥霍财富”。随后，以英国为代表的海洋强国开创了另一种可能性，并在工业革命后演变为全新的规则体系。工业革命彻底改变了游戏规则，使财富得以实现“复利积累”（compounding wealth），权力的硬通货随之由土地转变为工业、商业与贸易。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 大陆征服与海洋秩序的财富逻辑对比
accDescr: 对比大陆帝国以土地为中心燃烧财富的模式与海洋秩序以规则和贸易为基础复合财富的模式。
subgraph Continental["大陆帝国模式 (Continentalist)"]
A["权力硬通货：土地与领土"] --> B["对外扩张与武力掠夺"]
B --> C["巨额战争消耗与燃烧财富"]
end
subgraph Maritime["海洋秩序模式 (Maritime Order)"]
D["权力硬通货：工商业与贸易"] --> E["通用规则体系与自由航行"]
E --> F["财富复利积累与全球繁荣"]
end
C -.->|"威胁颠覆"| E
```
在海洋世界秩序下，财富的复合增长依赖于普适通行的规则体系。佩因向主持人举例说明：无论旅行到世界上哪个角落，人们口袋里的小小塑料卡片（信用卡）都能正常刷卡消费；小型跨国企业在多国开展业务，无须担忧合法所得被强权随意剥夺，所有的跨境交易都能顺畅清算。然而，许多将大笔资金注入大陆强权与威权体系的亿万富翁们尚未意识到，一旦这一基于规则的海洋秩序崩解，他们赖以生存的繁荣世界也将瞬间蒸发，他们自己同样会沦为牺牲品。佩因充满忧虑地表示，地球上最宝贵的莫过于下一代年轻人，而当今掌权的鲁莽领袖正把他们推向深渊：“一旦战争爆发，开端总是很容易，但真正结束它们却异常艰难。”失败的一方为了避免认输，往往会在早已大势已去的情况下继续盲目加码。
- 大陆强权将安全建立在领土扩张之上，边境扩张伴随着行政与驻军成本的无限失血。
- 海洋秩序依靠规则互通与航道自由，创造了工业革命后人类财富成倍复合增长的物质基础。
- 输家不愿接受既成事实，是导致当代区域战争陷入长期血腥消耗、无法轻易终结的核心心理与政治机制。
---
### [05:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=308s) 负面目标与国家治理：防止灾难的无形功绩
针对主持人提出的疑问——冷战以来几乎年年都有人鼓吹“第三次世界大战即将来临”，当下究竟有何不同——佩因引入了战略学中至关重要的一对概念：“正面目标”（Positive Objectives）与“负面目标”（Negative Objectives）。所谓正面目标，是指主动促成某件具体事情的发生，例如“抓捕马杜罗并将其关进纽约监狱”，目标达成与否一目了然且容易检验。而负面目标则是“防止某类坏事的发生”。
佩因指出，负面目标的难点在于其成效根本无法被直观证明：过去数十年间人类究竟成功阻止了多少次潜在的世界大战爆发？威慑力量到底发挥了多大作用？外界总是质疑“你如何证明”。她以父母育儿做了一个极具画面感的类比：带年幼的孩子在纽约街头散步，父母的大部分工作都是在追求负面目标——紧紧牵住孩子的手，防止他们突然冲进车流被撞倒。父母一天之中可能无数次挽救了孩子的生命，但孩子平平安安回到家时，并没有显眼的奖章来记录这些危险的化解。
佩因认为，这一逻辑同样揭示了政府运作的本质悖论：“负面目标极其重要，而且正因为我谈到这个话题，我相信政府的核心职能主要就是为了实现负面目标，也就是防止灾难发生。”首要灾难是抵御外敌入侵，其次是日常维系——定期检查桥梁以防止坍塌，对专业人员实行资质考核以防止医疗事故与欺诈，普及基础教育以消除全民文盲。在一切顺遂的日子里，民众往往理所当然地认为“政府最近什么也没为我做”，但事实上，免于灾难的常态本身正是负面目标成功运行的结果。然而，当前国际局势之所以危机四伏，正是因为大国领导层开始系统性地忽视并放弃了维系和平的“负面目标”。
- 正面目标追求行动的可见结果，容易被政治家拿来当作可量化的政绩炫耀。
- 负面目标专注于排查系统性风险，其成功体现为“什么灾难都没有发生”，因而极难获得政治赞赏。
- 战略威慑的有效性属于典型的负面目标，当决策者对维系威慑的日常成本失去耐心时，体系便会迅速走向崩溃。
---
### [07:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=421s) 霍尔木兹海峡与战略盲区：伊朗战事的灾难性误判
佩因断言，目前悬在墙上的清晰不祥之兆，便是美国在伊朗方向上的军事冒进，她称其为“人类历史上最无能的战争之一”。从战略学的基本常识来看，如果一场战争非打不可，唯一正确的做法是“将所有成本强加给作战对手，同时最大限度地降低自身成本”。然而眼下的对伊冲突完全本末倒置：不仅摧毁了美国自身的经济基本面，炸裂了美国的传统盟友体系，甚至给全球经济造成了毁灭性的附带打击。这一愚蠢举动彻底改变了美国的国际形象，使其从偶尔令人恼火的盟友，沦为全天下所有国家眼中威胁自身经济生计的头号敌人。
谈及这场战略灾难背后的决策评估机制，佩因指出了极其业余的战略盲区。在决定开战之前，严谨的评估不仅要看“己方长处与对方短处”，更必须清醒评估“对方的长处、己方的短板以及所有潜在相关第三方的利益反应”。显然，美方决策层完全缺失了这些关键维度，决策圈里甚至没有人清醒地预警伊朗会首先封锁霍尔木兹海峡。
佩因将霍尔木兹海峡比作一个被煮沸的热水袋：“狭窄的海域在战时极其容易被封锁。”正如乌克兰能够利用岸基火力与无人装备封锁黑海一样，狭窄水道一旦布满水雷并处于岸基火炮与反舰导弹的射程内，一切海上航运都会立即瘫痪。这种地理死局直接动摇了美军的远征后勤根基：
| 军事基地 / 节点 | 地理位置与作战现实 | 面临的战略困境 |
|:--- |:--- |:--- |
| **霍尔木兹海峡 (Strait of Hormuz)** | 波斯湾咽喉狭窄水道 | 极易被水雷和岸导彻底封锁，切断无备用海岸线国家的出海通道 |
| **巴林基地 (Bahrain)** | 位于波斯湾内，美军第五舰队核心驻地 | 因海峡被封死，外部增援与舰队进出完全受阻，战时难以发挥枢纽职能 |
| **迪戈加西亚基地 (Diego Garcia)** | 印度洋中部的孤立环礁，距波斯湾约 2500 英里 | 距离战场过于遥远且空间狭小，难以有效维持战区高强度的持续后勤与兵力投送 |
主持人追问，白宫理应聚集了大量顶尖智囊，为何未能预见如此显而易见的地理与经济后果。佩因嘲讽地回应道，那是拥有马蒂斯将军（General Jim Mattis）等专业军人的第一届特朗普政府时期的事了。如今的指挥中枢换成了“皮特少校”（指候任国防部长皮特·海格塞斯 Pete Hegseth）。佩因辛辣地讽刺称，这位少校唯一的强项就是在军中甄别并解雇黑人和女性军官，甚至还在军队里推行睾酮测试；让缺乏大局观与军事常识的人掌管五角大楼，必然会导致战略层面的全面盲目与灾难。
### [09:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=578s) 美国的傲慢与“半场网球”式的战略盲区
美国政界当下充斥着大量缺乏历史眼界与专业素养的官员，这种德不配位使局面变得极为危险；他们不仅在透支下一代的未来，也在毁掉共和党自身的前景。当被问及这些政策制定者究竟有何预期时，Sarah Paine 教授指出，美国普遍存在两种傲慢：
- **A 型傲慢（Type A American hubris）**：盲目认定世界上所有重要的决策都发生在美国本土。
- **B 型傲慢（Type B American hubris）**：在科技新贵（Tech bros）中尤为流行，误以为“你在某个领域极其擅长，就代表你在所有事情上都是行家”。真正的战略需要谦逊，需要认清专业能力的边界，学会倾听异见以发现自身盲区。然而，当前美国决策圈充斥着唯唯诺诺的“应声虫”（yes-men），不断铸成重大战略失误，给国家安全带来了不可逆的破坏。
主持人指出，自己有生以来第一次听到美国总统公开谈论吞并别国领土（例如谈论委内瑞拉、声称要将加拿大变为第 51 个州，甚至以为斩首伊朗领导人后当地民众就会揭竿而起）。Sarah Paine 评价特朗普本质上是一个“大陆主义者”（continentalist）和“地产商人”，看待世界就像看待房地产。
针对这种外交思维，Sarah Paine 提出了**“半场网球”（halfcourt tennis）**的隐喻：美国就像一个只盯着自己半场、从不过网观察对手的网球选手。无论是美式橄榄球还是欧洲足球，狂热的球迷不仅对主队了如指掌，连所有主要对手及球员的技术细节都能如数家珍；但在生死攸关的外交政策上，决策层却根本不去研究对手。例如伊朗制作的乐高讽刺动画，表面上是在戏弄美国，实则反映出伊朗人对美国社会的底层逻辑有着极深的研究，而美国对伊朗的实际情况却一无所知。
> “Type B American hubris, which applies to some of the tech bros, is just because you're really good at something doesn't make you really good at everything.” —— Dr. Sarah Paine
### [12:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=745s) “情境”与“问题”的区别：从冷战经验到伊朗核僵局
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 战略思维中情境与问题的应对模式
accDescr: 区分不可根除的情境与可被解决的问题，展现对应战略手段的差异。
subgraph Circumstance["不可解决的『情境』(Circumstance)"]
C1["目标不可行<br/>（如消灭冷战苏联 / 占领9000万人口的伊朗）"] --> C2["冒进将导致战略过度透支与毁灭"]
C2 --> C3["正确策略：设定边界、管理风险"]
C3 --> C4["制裁压制敌方增长 + 强化自身盟友繁荣"]
end
subgraph Problem["可解决的『问题』(Problem)"]
P1["目标切实可行"] --> P2["调配国家资源彻底解决"]
end
```
Sarah Paine 强调必须厘清战略学上的两个核心概念：**“情境”（Circumstance）**与**“问题”（Problem）**。
- **情境（Circumstance）**：某些现实虽然极不理想，但根本无法彻底消除（例如“让全球所有人瞬间成为千万富翁”）。面对不可行目标若强行出击，必将导致严重的战略过度透支。美国“最伟大的一代”深知苏联是致命威胁，但它是一个无法被一劳永逸消灭的“情境”——一旦试图武力解决，结局就是核毁灭。因此冷战策略是**管理（Managing）**：用精准制裁压制苏联增长，同时竭力拉动联盟体系内部的经济繁荣；而绝非像今天这样无差别对所有盟友加征关税。
- **问题（Problem）**：在现实可行范围内、能够找到方案予以解决的麻烦。
当前美国误将伊朗当成一个可以强行“解决”的问题，完全忽略了基本的人口与军事算力。Sarah Paine 列举了一组历史对比数据：
- 二战后盟军仅为了占领领土扩张后的纳粹德国（人口约 8000 万），就部署了约 150 万占领军（这还没算上苏联方面调动的大规模兵力）。
- 如今伊朗拥有约 9000 万人口，在军事上对其进行全面占领或强行颠覆根本不可行。
当年奥巴马政府签署的《伊核协议》（JCPOA）是联合国安理会五大常任理事国与欧盟共同认可的成果。该协议虽不完美，但通过极具侵入性的核查系统，以可承受的成本遏制了伊朗的核能力。然而，美国撕毁协议并发动极限施压后，给全世界敲响的反面警钟就是——“赶紧拥核自保”（get a nuke）。普京发动的乌克兰战争与美国的对伊政策，正在戏剧性地反噬自身，彻底刺激了全球核扩散。
> “Was it perfect? No. But it was feasible and it mitigated the threat to make it bearable. Now, what's the lesson for Iran? What do you suppose the lesson is for everybody now called get a nuke, right? With these wars, it's like if you don't have one, you're toast.” —— Dr. Sarah Paine
### [15:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=941s) 什么是“关键错误”？普京与美国的地缘自戕
Sarah Paine 深入阐释了其代表性战略概念——**关键错误（Pivotal error）**：
- **定义**：一旦走错这一步，原本拥有的所有优质选项瞬间归零，而且你永远无法回到过去，剩下的只是一堆更坏的次优选择。
- **普京的范例**：全面入侵乌克兰是一场典型的关键错误。俄罗斯几乎耗尽了冷战时期积累的全部常规武器库。若普京当初仅止步于 2014 年派“小绿人”吞并克里米亚和渗透顿巴斯，采取温水煮青蛙的方式让乌克兰长期慢性失稳，他的处境会好得多。恰恰是这场全面战争，以极其惨烈的代价凝聚了乌克兰的现代国家认同（如同美国独立战争在反抗英国的过程中催生了统一的美利坚民族认同与国家机构）。
- **美国的外交范例**：撕毁协议与鲁莽的外交政策使美国彻底失去了盟友的信任。即便未来有新政府试图修复，那种不可替代的信誉基石也已荡然无存。
> “Pivotal error is once you've made it, the choices that you had before, they're a lot better than ones you have now. And you never get the old ones back.” —— Dr. Sarah Paine
### [17:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1035s) 战后规则体系瓦解与欧洲“去美国化”自救
主持人提问：二战后国际秩序正走向瓦解，甚至滑向第二次冷战或核战争风险，究竟是什么在崩溃？
Sarah Paine 用“交通规则”做类比：社会的运转依靠全员默守的行为规范（Norms）。不论在哪个国家靠哪侧通行、遇到红灯停下，绝大多数人都自觉遵守规则；若所有人同时违规，世界上根本没有足够的警察来维持秩序。无论是基于规则的国际秩序（Rules-based order），还是美国的国内法治，核心全系于“愿赌服服”的规范共识——比如败选后坦然祝贺对手并誓言下次再战，而不是动辄指责“对方作弊”。
当美国带头背弃这些规范并走向收缩与孤立时，一种空前的生存危机正倒逼欧洲以历史上罕见的速度展开**快速制度建设（institution building）**与安全自立：
- **波罗的海与北欧联合（Nordic-Baltic Eight, NB8）**：芬兰、瑞典、挪威、丹麦北欧四国，与爱沙尼亚、拉脱维亚、立陶宛波罗的海三国及冰岛紧密结盟，全面推进重新军事化与联合防务协同。
- **航天与卫星网络自主化**：多国加速推进本土航天发射场（Spaceports）建设。除挪威、瑞典现有设施外，英国正在设德兰群岛（Shetland Islands）新建太空港，旨在建立脱离美国依赖的欧洲自主卫星星座。
- **金融与消费去美化**：欧洲对美国主导的信用卡与结算体系产生深度戒心，正在研发推广本土支付工具。欧洲甚至出现了特定消费 App，扫描条形码即可提示该商品是否产自美国，促使消费者发起抵制（Boycott）美货的行动。
- 加拿大等传统盟友的高层政要（如前央行行长马克·卡尼等人）也在全球穿梭游说，联合多国重组独立于美国的协作网络。
> “The rules-based order was always based on norms of following them and the US legal order was based on norms of everyone more or less following them.” —— Dr. Sarah Paine
### [19:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1182s) 盟友反弹与美国单边孤立主义的代价
国际秩序正滑向由中等强国（middle powers）重构的新格局。Sarah Paine 直言美国正在偏离正轨：“美国在两次世界大战中都站在了正确的一方，在诸多领域做出了极其积极的贡献，但我们如今的所作所为是如此消极，甚至会对我们下一代的未来造成深远的破坏。”针对国内主张“彻底抽身俄乌冲突、全面停止对外干预”的孤立主义呼声，Paine 明确划分了底线：美国绝不应像在中东那样派驻地面战斗部队，而是应当在战略和装备上武装乌克兰，支持他们自卫取胜。她指出，向盟友提供解决冲突所需之物不仅花钱最少，也是最划算的做法；真正的昂贵代价，是美国鲁莽地撕毁与背弃自身的盟友体系。
这种外交恶化已经直接反噬到美国本土的实体经济。随着盟国发起抵制，各行各业正遭遇重创——例如肯塔基州的波旁威士忌（Kentucky bourbon）酿酒厂因加拿大消费者拒绝购买美国酒类而被迫停业。Paine 指出，即使加拿大市场仅占一家企业全部营收的 5% 到 10%，一旦遭遇全面抵制，损失的往往就是赖以生存的全部净利润率。如今加拿大正在主动加速“去风险”（derisk），转而向欧洲等地开辟能源出口渠道。Paine 批评道：“这完全是我们自己的过错，是我们主动去威胁了他们。”
- **盟友体系瓦解的连锁反应**：美国与传统盟友关系破裂直接导致民间与官方的反制抵制。
- **中小企业利润敞口**：5% 至 10% 的邻国出口份额一旦归零，足以抹平企业整体的利润边界。
- **地缘经济脱钩**：加拿大等邻国被迫寻找欧洲等替代市场以规避来自美国的政策风险。
---
### [21:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1272s) 有限目标、无限目标与陷入“死地”的困境
围绕民众“为何要替别国的漫长战争买单”的质疑，Paine 引入了战略学上“有限目标”（limited objectives）与“无限目标”（unlimited objectives）的理论框架。所谓无限目标，其核心在于政权更迭（regime change），其最极端的变体则是种族灭绝（genocide）——当年阿道夫·希特勒（Adolf Hitler）二者兼具，而弗拉基米尔·普京（Vladimir Putin）的目标同样具备极强的无限性。普京不仅谋求吞并乌克兰全境，战争初期还曾派遣暗杀队试图处决弗拉基米尔·泽连斯基（Volodymyr Zelenskyy）全家，甚至针对乌克兰的文化学者、传播者进行系统性清洗。相对而言，有限目标的跨度则极其广泛，从“割占半个国家”一直延伸到国际交往中的摩擦。Paine 强调，面对俄乌局势必须持续修正认知：“犯错并不可怕，意识到自己判断错误时，只需承认‘我获得了新信息，这就是我改变想法的原因’，但我认为俄罗斯拥有的是无限目标，普京想要重建旧苏联帝国。”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 战略目标光谱图
accDescr: 展示从最温和的有限目标到包含种族灭绝的无限目标的递进关系。
subgraph Unlimited["无限目标 (Unlimited Objectives)"]
U1["种族灭绝 + 政权更迭<br/>(吞并国家、文化清洗、肉体消灭首脑)"]
U2["单纯政权更迭<br/>(推翻现有体制)"]
end
subgraph Limited["有限目标 (Limited Objectives)"]
L1["割占部分领土<br/>(如吞并边境省份或半壁江山)"]
L2["局部利益争端<br/>(外交施压与贸易摩擦)"]
end
Unlimited -->|"目标升级：逼迫对手退无可退"| DeathGround["战略死地 (Death Ground)<br/>对手只能拼死抵抗，低效国家亦被淬炼为致命宿敌"]
Limited -.->|"妥协空间"| PeacefulExit["谈判与战略妥协空间"]
```
Paine 指出，俄罗斯自沙皇时代起便长期处于欧洲发展的洼地，其经济模式存在致命缺陷，始终无法生产出全球消费者渴望购买的制成品（Manufactured goods），斯米诺伏特加（Smirnoff）本质上是一家英国公司，俄国依赖的始终是基础初级资源。冷战时期其对外输出体制拉低了各地的生活水平；而如今，普京秉持大陆强权（continentalist）掠夺别国财富的思维，发动了这场甚至出现士兵洗劫笨重洗衣机的拙劣侵略。更重要的是，施加无限目标在军事上等于将对手逼入“死地”（death ground）：“如果你对某人抱有无限目标，你实际上就是把对方置于死地。这意味着什么？这意味着如果他们不抵抗，你就会直接杀了他们；所以他们的唯一选择只有战斗到底。”正如希特勒在苏联领教过的那样，面临灭顶之灾的绝境会将原本千疮百孔的对手瞬间淬炼成极度致命的敌人。同理，如果美国与本雅明·内塔尼亚胡（Benjamin Netanyahu）将伊朗逼入死地，即便原本反核的最高领袖离场，其后继者也必将反扑，甚至可能诱发唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump）动用战术核武器的极端风险。面对主持人对核风险真实性的追问，Paine 坦言，若在十年前有人断言美国会抛弃联盟、将加拿大视作第 51 个州、威胁强占格陵兰岛，任何人都会觉得荒谬绝伦，但如今这些荒诞情景已然真实发生。
- **闪击战的认知崩塌**：泽连斯基曾对主持人透露，开战初期俄军士兵随身仅携带了 3 到 10 天的口粮，甚至行李箱里还装着准备在基辅举行胜利阅兵的军礼服，却在街头迎头撞上投掷莫洛托夫鸡尾酒（Molotov cocktails）的乌克兰平民。
- **死地效应的历史重演**：斯大林在大清洗中枪毙了大批苏军军官，并在乌克兰制造大饥荒，但纳粹的无限灭绝目标反倒激发出苏联全部的死战能量。
- **核门槛的危险性**：美国若在伊朗动用战术核武，将坐实全球唯一三次投掷核武器国家的历史恶名。
---
### [26:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1617s) 通胀危机与大陆型帝国的 360 度扩张本能
面对欧美民众因能源危机、加油站汽油价格飞涨而希望迅速妥协的普遍怨言，Paine 将核心解决途径归结为参与民主选举：“去投票。美国当下三分之一的人投票支持现状，三分之一的人投给了任何反对现状的候选人，还有三分之一的人甚至懒得离开沙发。站起来去投票，因为这事关你孩子的未来。”她指出，特朗普在这场战争中绝不会轻易认错转向，而在两党制民主体制下纠正战略盲区的最有效机制，就是通过选举把另一政党送上台。针对英国舆论中“不如干脆让俄罗斯吞并乌克兰以换取能源价格稳定”的观点，Paine 指出这忽视了军事学院最重要的铁律之一：“敌人也是有投票权的（the enemy gets a vote）——不管你喜欢与否，俄罗斯人都绝不会止步。”
Paine 拿过现场的领土版图分析指出，俄罗斯的大陆型帝国本质决定了其扩张从未有过休止符。从普京借第二次车臣战争崛起并赢得民意支持，到 2008 年入侵格鲁吉亚扶持南奥塞梯与阿布哈兹分裂，再到政治上完全吞并白俄罗斯、切断德涅斯特河沿岸（Transnistria）以及割裂乌克兰，俄国的战略视野如同一艘全方位巡视的太空飞船仪表盘。Paine 形象地将其比喻为动画片《杰森一家》（The Jetsons）里的圆形飞船飞碟——大陆强权者坐在控制台前，其视线是围绕边界 360 度向外扫描的，始终渴望向四面八方推高边界。一旦达成“计划 A”，紧接着就会推进下一步扩张，数百年来的俄国历史始终循环往复。
- **三三制选民结构**：大约三分之一支持执政现状，三分之一反对现状，另有三分之一选民彻底冷漠弃权。
- **威权扩张的连贯弧线**：普京的地缘扩张路径清晰贯穿了车臣危机、2008 年格鲁吉亚战争、白俄罗斯的附庸化以及针对乌克兰的全面战事。
- **大陆帝国的 360 度仪表盘逻辑**：大陆强权无法接受安全边界的静止，其战略防御建立在无休止向外扩张吞并缓冲地带的基础之上。
### [29:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1790s) 冷战终结的教训与乌克兰不可调和的复仇怒火
历史学家莎拉·佩因（Dr. Sarah Paine）首先回顾了冷战的结局。老布什（George H. W. Bush）与德国总理赫尔穆特·科尔（Helmut Kohl）展现了极为出色的“战争终结”（war termination）艺术，使得冷战完全按照西方设定的条件平稳落幕。随后世界进入了一段神奇的冷战后和平期——中国与俄罗斯转向国内事务，美国大体恪守国际规则，全球免于陷入各方资助对立叛乱势力的代理人战争。佩因强调，领土征服战争只会毁灭财富，即便弗拉基米尔·普京（Vladimir Putin）夺取乌克兰的部分土地，留下的也仅仅是一片被彻底夷平的废墟。
当谈及战事是否会停止时，史蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）分享了他与乌克兰总统弗拉基米尔·泽连斯基（Volodymyr Zelenskyy）的面对面谈话。泽连斯基曾对巴特利特坦言：“他们将永远战斗下去（They're going to go forever）。”泽连斯基向巴特利特讲述了一处俄军遗弃的战壕，里面堆放着 500 具遭受残酷折磨、被捆绑的各年龄段平民尸体。泽连斯基直言，认为遇难者家属会接受战争突然停止、彻底放弃复仇是极其天真的想法。泽连斯基私下对巴特利特表示：“我知道我也许不该这么说，但我想要复仇。如果你亲眼目睹了我所看到的一切，你也会想要复仇。”
佩因对此深表理解，并指出俄军的行为令人发指。在人类近代史上，纳粹德国曾因二战暴行而长期承受恶名之冠，但现代德国早已通过彻底的教育体系改革洗心革面；如今普京（佩因戏称为“恶人弗拉德”，Vlad the Bad）及其军队亲手接过了这顶耻辱之冠。佩因特别驳斥了许多当代俄罗斯人“苏联罪行与俄罗斯无关”的推脱借口。她指出，法国人谈及“法兰西”时囊括了五个共和国、君主制及拿破仑时代的一切历史，而正是俄罗斯掌控并运作了苏联，他们必须对苏联历史承担责任，而不是毫无悔意地推卸罪责。
- 德国已经通过彻底改革教育系统甩掉了二战历史的道德枷锁，没有任何现代德国人需要对当年的罪行负责。
- 俄罗斯企图将苏联历史与自身切割，但历史事实是俄罗斯主导了整个苏联体制。
- 罗曼诺夫王朝时期的俄国尚且渴望与西欧保持联系，即使末代沙皇尼古拉二世（Nicholas II）曾感叹俄国落后欧洲 200 年并试图走自己的道路；而布尔什维克上台后，目标则变成了推翻整个资本主义世界秩序。
### [33:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1988s) 大陆扩张主义的威胁与谎言治国的崩溃代价
佩因指出，以俄罗斯和中国为代表的“大陆主义者”（Continentalists）极度危险，他们试图效仿古代欧亚帝国的旧梦，将全球强行划分为彼此对立的势力范围，并在势力范围的交界边缘无休止地争夺利益。出人意料的是，佩因将唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump）也归入具备大陆主义特征的行列，列举了他对加拿大领土和格陵兰岛的觊觎、扣押外国元首（如针对委内瑞拉总统马杜罗的行动）等破坏海洋规则秩序的举措。在谈及能源通胀对英国普通民众日常生活的重创时，佩因直言这正是特朗普对伊朗挑起冲突政策的恶果，而非乔·拜登（Joe Biden）造成的。
当巴特利特提到特朗普常以“防止伊朗制造核武器”为由为自己辩解时，佩因指出，这种激进打击不仅没能消除危机，反而极大地刺激了伊朗全力发展核武的决心。佩因借此深入分析了“将谎言常态化”给国家运转带来的系统性毁灭。她以苏联中央计划经济体制为例：由于整个社会依靠自上而下的谎言运转，下层单位（如一家播客机构）在向上申报物资需求时，出于对分配不足的担忧，会本能地夸大设备需求、隐瞒实际库存。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 苏联计划经济体制下的谎言失真循环
accDescr: 基层虚报数据逐级汇总后产生严重失真，最终导致中央决策机构重大资源错配与经济崩溃。
subgraph Base ["基层数据申报"]
A["基层单位"] -->|"夸大设备需求\n隐瞒现有库存"| B["各行业虚假数据"]
end
subgraph Aggregation ["数据自下而上汇总"]
B -->|"层层失真与美化"| C["莫斯科中央规划部门"]
end
subgraph Failure ["中央决策与崩溃"]
C -->|"依据虚假数据配置资源"| D["劳动力与资本严重错配"]
D -->|"危机恶化转移"| E["体制最终内爆解体"]
end
```
这种充斥全社会的虚假数据被层层汇总到莫斯科中央，导致中央决策层依据荒唐的数据来配置资本与劳动力，最终引发癌变般的系统性灾难并导致帝国崩塌。佩因警告，西方若将欺瞒与谎言常态化，必将步其后尘。
此外，佩因利用“72法则”（基于自然对数公式 $\ln(2) / r$）展示了经济增长率对国家长远命运的决定性影响：
- 经济年增长率为 1% 时，经济总量翻倍需要约 69 至 70 年。
- 经济年增长率为 3% 时，经济总量翻倍仅需 23 年（仅 2% 的微小利差，导致翻倍时间缩短了近半个世纪）。
- 自残式的关税壁垒或卷入推高物价的海外战争，若使本国年均增速缩水 2%，将直接把国民财富翻倍的等待期从 23 年拉长到 71 年。
- 佩因将盟友协同实施的精准经济制裁比作“化疗”（Chemotherapy）：“制裁不能解决问题，但能缩减对手的钱袋子；配合盟友协作，则能壮大自身——你无法切除肿瘤，但可以将其压缩萎缩。”
### [37:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2246s) 独裁体制的致命陷阱：普京为何没有“活命下坡路”
巴特利特询问拥有俄罗斯历史博士学位的佩因：从历史深层逻辑来看，俄乌冲突接下来将如何演变？普京是否已经犯下了不可逆转的致命错误？佩因明确断言：“一切已经尘埃落定。他只会继续往前冲，他只会不断升级并继续向前。”关于普京为何绝不可能退缩，佩因深刻剖析了独裁政权的体制死局：
> “这就是独裁统治的问题所在。选举机制的美妙之处在于：他们把你赶下台，但没人会杀你，没人会夺走你的银行账户。这极大地消除了权力更迭时那种让人手心出汗的生死恐惧。”
在俄罗斯历史上，斯大林死后，继任的赫鲁晓夫等领导集体达成默契，改变了残酷枪决政治对手的做法，允许退位领袖带着待遇退休去乡下度假别墅（dacha）度过余生。然而，普京却亲手摧毁了这种机制，将自己逼入绝境。佩因指出，许多独裁者面临的终极困境在于：他们根本不存在任何能让自己保住性命的政治“退路”（offramp）。
巴特利特追问，普京是否可能主动退休、搬去豪华庄园安享晚年？佩因明确反驳称这绝无可能：
- 普京本身维系着一个庞大的黑帮式利益保护伞网络（protection racket）。一旦交出权力，其最亲密的核心圈子内部就会有人因利益清算而对他痛下杀手。
- 对独裁者而言，除正常生老病死外，失去权力的下场通常极其血腥。
- 针对普京政权看似坚不可摧的现状，佩因总结道：“独裁政权最诡异的特性在于：直到它们碎成齑粉的前一天，它们看起来都是永恒不灭的；而崩溃的瞬间是根本无法预测的。”
- 历史往往重演：罗曼诺夫王朝末代沙皇尼古拉二世正如今日的普京，在毫无必要的情况下发动了 1904–1905 年的日俄战争。佩因反问：俄罗斯已经是世界上领土最庞大的国家，为何历代统治者始终被这种争夺更多领土的病态执念所绑架？这场毫无意义的帝国冒险，最终正是敲响沙皇体制丧钟的催化剂。
### [39:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2382s) 机会成本与沙俄帝国的历史教训
俄罗斯拥有极其辽阔的疆土与丰富的自然资源，但其根本问题在于缺乏将资源转化为持久繁荣的经济模式。俄罗斯长期拒绝遵循以规则为基础的制度规范，导致年轻人即使创业成功，也无法合法、安全地保留属于自己的财富，反而随时面临被盘剥与勒索的风险。
从历史维度审视，沙皇尼古拉二世发动日俄战争便是一个典范性的战略败笔。这不仅导致了惨败，更带来了毁灭性的机会成本：当国家将全部财政与物资投入远东战场时，就无法在俄罗斯西部修建至关重要的铁路网络。当第一次世界大战爆发时，落后的交通运输导致军队无法高效部署，而俄罗斯的主要海上门户——波罗的海与黑海——在战时遭到严密封锁，盟国物资根本无法运达。
最终，彼得格勒爆发的面包与粮食骚乱直接推翻了沙皇政权。如果尼古拉二世没有在远东挥霍国力，而是将资金用于修建国内铁路，不仅能够高效调配粮食、接纳外部援助，整个历史进程也可能完全改写。正如 Sarah Paine 所言：“这些机会成本是极其巨大的。”（“These opportunity costs are huge.”）如今普京深陷乌克兰战场，重蹈覆辙，其国力透支的代价同样在持续累积。
### [41:10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2470s) 中俄战略博弈与俄乌战争的死结
在当前战局中，中国正在向俄罗斯提供维持运转所必需的物资与零部件（用于制造导弹等装备）。对于中国支持俄罗斯的动机，Sarah Paine 深入剖析指出：中国战略的核心诉求是希望美国彻底退出亚洲及全球各项事务；与此同时，中国对俄罗斯本身并无天然好感。
历史上，俄罗斯从中国势力范围割占的领土面积，甚至超过了美国密西西比河以东所有国土的总和，中国对此记忆犹新。如今，俄罗斯因能源等出口受西方严厉制裁，中国得以凭借极低的价格采购俄罗斯资源，并在谈判中占据极高的要价权。在向俄方出售商品牟利的同时，这种依赖关系实际上是在不断消耗与削弱俄罗斯。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: 中俄在乌克兰危机中的利益交换与消耗机制
accDescr: 展示西方制裁下，俄罗斯依赖中国资源导致国力被动消耗的动态流动图。
subgraph Russia["俄罗斯 (普京政权)"]
A["战场消耗与西方严厉制裁"]
B["贱卖廉价能源与大宗资源"]
end
subgraph China["中国"]
C["获取廉价能源/主导贸易定价"]
D["高价供应军民两用物资/导弹零部件"]
end
A -->|"受制裁被迫转向"| B
B -->|"输送折价资源"| C
C -->|"供应工业制造部件"| D
D -->|"维持战场运转"| A
style Russia fill:#f9f0f0,stroke:#d9534f
style China fill:#f0f4f8,stroke:#0275d8
```
以往俄罗斯凭借庞大的核武库令周边国家忌惮，但如今普京将常规军力与战略威慑挥霍殆尽，连乌克兰战局都难以掌控。更严峻的是，俄罗斯面临着出生率骤降等长期人口危机，国家前景持续恶化。当被问及俄罗斯为何不直接动用核武器夷平乌克兰时，Sarah Paine 坦言核武器不仅维护成本极高，且印度与中国此前已向莫斯科明确划出红线，警告绝不可跨越核门槛。
面对当前的战争僵局，双方陷入了零和博弈：泽连斯基誓言寸土不让，而普京为了维持国内权力和统治权威，必须向国民和邻国展示某种“胜利”成果。这种无限战争（Unlimited War）注定伴随着无法承受的代价。Sarah Paine 强调：“这正是发动无限战争的弊端所在。”（“No, that's the problem with unleashing unlimited wars.”）她提醒道，二战中仅苏联就有数千万人丧生，全球遇难者达 5500 万人，通过法律与外交机制在国际舞台周旋妥协，即使方案不完美，也远胜于重蹈全面毁灭的浩劫。乌克兰在前线抵挡侵略，实际上是替整个西方世界承担最沉重的牺牲，支持乌克兰就是捍卫本国安全与文明秩序。
### [45:26](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=2726s) 欧洲经济困境与美国税法制造的贫富鸿沟
国家政府的核心职责在于两点：保卫国家安全与促进经济繁荣。主持人指出，当下欧美民众对军援乌克兰产生倦怠与反对情绪，很大程度上源于内部危机——法国街头发生暴力纵火与打砸抢，英国国债已攀升至 3 万亿英镑、每年仅利息支出就高达 1100 亿英镑，各大媒体充斥着“英国即将破产”的悲观论调，整个欧洲显得脆弱而不堪重负。
面对这种普遍的迷茫与无力感，Sarah Paine 以二战后的历史激励年轻一代：
- **历史参照**：二战结束时整个欧洲沦为废墟，各国负债累累，但那一代人在短短 10 年内构建了维系欧洲三代人和平繁荣的制度架构。
- **当前机遇**：当下的体制僵局正在打破，尽管充满风险，却也是在新制度框架定型前大有作为的历史窗口。
- **改革方向**：欧洲需要精简繁冗监管以释放增长活力。
针对美国内部的不满，公众往往将生存困境与机会匮乏归咎于非法移民，但 Sarah Paine 尖锐地指出，核心根源实际上在于美国的税收法典（Tax Code）：
> “美国的税收法典让一小部分人变得极度富有，这本身就是一个巨大错误。”（“...the US tax code that allows people to become hugely wealthy is is an error.”）
过去 15 年间，美国税法机制直接推动财富向极少数寡头家族集中，全美如今有大约 1000 个身家达到或超过十亿美元的超级富豪家族。与此同时，劳动力市场不仅面临行业垄断（Monopoly，操纵商品售价），更遭受严重的买方垄断（Monopsony，即大雇主垄断特定区域或行业的劳动力需求，进而压低工人薪资）。这导致普通工薪族即使每周工作超过 40 小时依然入不敷出。Sarah Paine 认为，主流舆论缺少一档能逐行拆解美国税法、向公众揭示复杂税条如何剥夺普通人财富并加剧阶级撕裂的深度剖析节目。
### [50:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3006s) 赞助商插播：销售效率与极简主义
在深入政治讨论前，主持人插入了两则品牌赞助。首先是销售客户关系管理软件 Pipedrive。主持人分享了一组令他吃惊的数据：销售团队通常将大约 50% 的时间耗费在行政杂务和手动更新 CRM 上，而非真正促成交易，这对企业的盈利能力是致命打击。他在十年前创办上家公司时便转向使用 Pipedrive，该软件现已加入 AI 智能会议助手，能够自动整合历史交易记录、邮件及对话摘要，并在会后将记录转化为 CRM 自动草稿。随后，主持人引出“奥卡姆剃刀”（Occam's razor）原理，即最简单的方案往往是最有效的，并以此类比赞助商 Boncharge 的红光面罩，强调无需让美容和健康方案变得过于复杂。
- 销售团队平均将约 50% 的时间浪费在非销售的行政与手动录入工作中。
- Pipedrive 全球拥有超过 100,000 家企业用户。
- Boncharge 红光面罩结合红光与近红外光波长，每日佩戴 10 至 20 分钟以改善皮肤状态。
---
### [52:23](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3143s) 美国中期选举与政治规则的崩塌
主持人将话题拉回现实政治，询问即将到来的美国中期选举的意义与运作机制。Sarah Paine 博士解释，中期选举将全面改选众议院（任期两年）的所有席位，改选参议院（任期六年）的部分轮换席位，并涉及多州州长的选举。主持人梳理当前局势，指出特朗普阵营目前在国会参众两院及最高法院占据优势，并提及民调关于共和党可能失去参众两院控制权的预测。对此，Paine 博士态度极为审慎，直言民调在极端政治手段面前可能失效，并警告潜在的干预选举行为：“如果他要把移民及海关执法局（ICE）执法人员派到所有投票站，然后人们把投票机搬走……这就叫作规范的终结（the end of the norms）。”
Paine 博士将此次中期选举定性为对全体美国公民的严峻考验：“对于美国而言，这将是一次关于他们如何投票的国民智商测试，因为每次去加油站加油时，他们都清楚自己的油价为什么上涨。”（“it's going to be a national IQ test for the United States and on how they vote because every time they go to the pump, they know why their prices have gone up.”）她痛惜民众往往将身份认同盲目绑定于党派，却忽视了如今的共和党早已脱离艾森豪威尔或里根时期的传统原则，沦为围绕单个领导人的政治机器。她力劝选民应当以“维护国家安全”与“促进经济繁荣”为核心诉求，并猛烈抨击共和党掌控的参议院确认少校军衔的皮特·海格塞斯（Pete Hegseth）出任国防部长的决定，称这是严重的失职，直接为将美国卷入海外冲突埋下祸根。即便共和党失去国会，由于其彻底摒弃了两党合作的传统，特朗普仍会利用行政命令改变既成事实，如同在华盛顿高尔夫球场砍伐树龄数百年的古树一样，即便事后被认定违法，造成的破坏也已无法挽回。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 政治决策失衡与制度规范侵蚀机制
accDescr: 展示政治认同偏离核心目标如何通过极端任职与单边行政削弱国家安全与法律规范。
subgraph CoreValues["核心国家利益偏离"]
A["盲目党派认同\n（忽视国家安全与繁荣）"] --> B["关键职位妥协\n（缺乏合格防务领袖制衡）"]
end
subgraph InstitutionalErosion["制度与选举规范侵蚀"]
B --> C["破坏传统政治规范\n（行政干预选举与制衡失灵）"]
C --> D["单边行政命令\n（强行制造不可逆既成事实）"]
end
```
---
### [55:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3344s) 民主核心 vs 独裁政权的生存恐惧
讨论进一步转向全球冲突的根源：西方或者说自由世界真正的敌人究竟是谁？Paine 博士纠正了将世界简单划分为“西方”的习惯，提出应使用“民主核心”（democratic core）这一概念，涵盖中欧与西欧、日本、韩国、台湾、新西兰、澳大利亚以及北美。她同时对美国当前出现的帝国式单边冲动提出尖锐批评，认为威胁吞并格陵兰或将加拿大贬为“第51个州”的荒唐言行，完全背离了民主核心的价值观。
谈及独裁政权敌视民主的根本原因时，Paine 博士以海峡两岸为例进行了深刻剖析。台湾从体量上看仅为中国大陆的二百五十分之一，但其存在本身就是对独裁叙事的致命打击：“台湾的存在表明，在一个以汉族为主体的社会中，完全可以拥有充满活力的民主制度。”这一事实打破了“威权统治契合特定文化”的谎言。独裁者之所以对邻近的民主社会产生极度恐惧，根源在于自身合法性的缺失：
> “对于这些独裁者，问题其实是：伙计们，为什么不举行一场公平的选举呢？因为他们根本选不上。这就是原因。如果举行公平选举，习近平不会继续当中国领导人，弗拉基米尔·普京也不会继续当俄罗斯领导人，而他们将这视为生存威胁。”
> —— Sarah Paine
Paine 博士指出，民主政体之所以能创造巨大的经济财富，关键在于制度的包容性、法治保护以及对私人产权与商业成果的尊重。中国近代以来的财富爆发式增长，本质上也是源于其融入了基于海权规则的国际自由贸易体系；一旦独裁政权选择发动对外战争破坏这一秩序，其财富积累的进程必将戛然而止。
---
### [58:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3495s) 历史的回响：关税壁垒、大萧条与亚太战争连锁反应
针对主持人关于“中国历史上似乎远离战争”的直觉性发问，Paine 博士以宏大的历史纵深予以反驳，指出近现代东亚经历了一连串残酷且长期的战乱。从 1911 至 1912 年清朝覆灭开始，中国便陷入各省各路势力的军阀混战，随后在 1927 年左右演变为国共两党的长期对抗。
与此同时，1930 年美国在胡佛总统治下推行“美国优先”的孤立主义政策，为应对大萧条而强行出台高额关税。尽管经济学家苦苦劝阻，警告全球必将采取报复措施，胡佛仍一意孤行，最终引发全球贸易战，急剧加深了世界经济大萧条。高度依赖海外贸易的日本发现和平通商的道路被彻底切断，遂在狂热军国主义驱使下走上武力扩张道路，试图通过掠夺土地建立自给自足的帝国，并于 1931 年发动“九一八事变”侵占中国东北（满洲）。
随后局势呈现不可逆的螺旋升级：正是由于美国持续向抵抗侵略的中国提供援助，日本军部才孤注一掷策划偷袭珍珠港，企图逼迫尚未将夏威夷设为正式州的美国退出亚洲；然而美国不但没有妥协退让，反而倾举国之力反击。这一连串的地缘博弈导致从 1911 年清帝退位，历经抗日战争至 1945 年，再到 1949 年国共内战结束，中国及其周边整整经历了近四十载未曾停歇的惨烈战争。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: 1930年代美国孤立主义引发亚太战争的链式反应
accDescr: 描述1930年美国关税法案如何加剧大萧条、迫使日本对外扩张，最终导致二战太平洋战争爆发。
subgraph USPolicy["美国保护主义"]
T["1930年胡佛关税法案\n（美国优先/报复性关税）"] --> D["全球大萧条加深\n（国际贸易体系瘫痪）"]
end
subgraph AsiaEscalation["日本帝国主义扩张与冲突"]
D --> J["日本转向武力扩张\n（1931年侵略中国东北）"]
J --> C["东亚战火蔓延\n（美对华军援引发美日对抗）"]
C --> P["1941年珍珠港事件\n（太平洋战争全面爆发）"]
end
```
- 1911–1912年：清朝覆亡，中国陷入军阀混战割据时期。
- 1927年左右：中国内部局势演变成国共两党的长期武装对峙。
- 1930年：胡佛政府签署高关税法案，引爆全球报复性关税与贸易战，加剧大萧条。
- 1931年：日本为追求资源自给自足发动侵华战争，侵占满洲地区。
- 1941年：因美国军援中国及对日封锁，日本发动偷袭珍珠港（夏威夷直至 1959 年才正式成为美国第 50 个州）。
- 1945–1949年：二战结束后中国内战爆发，直至 1949 年大规模战事才基本落幕。
### [01:00:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3606s) 中国历史上的战争创伤与记忆断层
莎拉·佩因（Dr. Sarah Paine）回顾了 20 世纪中国所经历的一连串剧烈动荡。在毛泽东发起的各项政治运动之前，中国首先经历了 1950 年至 1953 年的朝鲜战争。随后在 1962 年的中印边境冲突中，中国虽然重创了印度，但在佩因看来，这一仗“把印度变成了永久的敌人，那是一个重大错误”。紧接着是代价高昂、速战速决的 1979 年对越自卫反击战。在国内层面，毛泽东为了巩固自身权力，相继掀起反右运动和文化大革命；更早之前，“大跃进”引发了大饥荒，而在千百万人面临饥饿之际，为了换取维持运作的外汇与零钱，粮食依然源源不断地被运往国外出口。
经历过如此深重灾难的人民，按常理绝对不愿再卷入任何战争，只想安稳休养生息。然而佩因指出，当下地缘政治中最危险的盲区在于世代更替：当年亲自上过战场、深知战争毁灭性代价、懂得极力避免战火重演的那一代人，如今已经全部离世。历史记忆的消逝，使得后来的决策者更容易轻率地迈向冲突边缘。
### [01:01:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3666s) 走向第三次世界大战：核威慑是否失效？
当主持人询问如果沿着当下的对抗轨道继续发展，未来会是什么景象时，佩因斩钉截铁地回答：“它看起来就像第二次世界大战。”她重申了“消极目标”（negative objectives）的重要性——大国政治的首要任务是防止灾难性战争爆发，因为战端一开便极难收场。她以特朗普在伊朗问题上的姿态为例，指出领导人一旦陷入泥潭就绝不愿认输，只会想方设法证明自己赢了。
主持人随即展示了一张各国拥核数量的图表，反驳称当今世界处于核威慑时代，相互保证毁灭（MAD）机制能够让各大玩家在极端情况下不敢轻举妄动，从而保障底线安全。佩因当场否定了这种乐观判断。她指出，弗拉基米尔·普京（Vladimir Putin）已经在不断打破并颠覆这种平衡：俄罗斯不仅公开威胁北约盟国，其无人机还频繁侵犯黑海沿岸国家（如保加利亚、罗马尼亚）的领空领海并被击落。佩因警告，这种试探正在无限逼近北约宪章第五条（Article 5）集体防御条款的红线：
> “而亲历并铭记二战的那一代人活着的时候，他们极其谨慎地不去触发它。但这并不适用于我们现在的这批领导人。”——莎拉·佩因（Dr. Sarah Paine）
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 核威慑逐步失灵与冲突升级链条
accDescr: 展示核威慑如何在边境侵扰与非理性挑衅下逐步逼近北约集体防御触发点的过程。
subgraph Provocation ["灰色地带试探"]
A["常规核威慑 (MAD) 平衡被打破"] --> B["无人机侵犯黑海领空领海<br>(保加利亚/罗马尼亚)"]
end
subgraph Escalation ["条约危机"]
B --> C["逼近北约第 5 条款红线"]
C --> D["欧洲盟友陷入两难抉择"]
end
subgraph Breakdown ["失控风险"]
D --> E["历史记忆断层：<br>新一代领导人缺乏二战敬畏"]
E --> F["全面阵营大战爆发"]
end
```
### [01:02:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3761s) 极权人格的毁灭性与国内政治僵局
主持人提问，如果普京挥师入侵波兰，是否就意味着第三次世界大战正式爆发。佩因毫不犹豫地回答“是的”。至于这场战争的具体图景，佩因表示没人能够准确预料，但任何人都可以打开电脑模拟软件，任意选择一枚核弹的当量投掷在某座城市上空，亲眼看看瞬间死亡的人数规模是多么触目惊心。佩因将冲突升级的根本原因归结于统治者的阴暗人格（dark personalities）：普京这类专制者根本不在乎杀死多少人，而人类往往要等到集中营出现、希特勒式的人物酿成滔天大祸时，才后知后觉地意识到危险。普通人之所以无法及早识破他们，是因为常人无法想象有人会以给他人制造极度痛苦为乐。
面对这种内外困境，佩因指出，对于美国而言，一种政治出路在于国会在下一任期启动弹劾并将其定罪，彻底终结其政治生命。然而这引发了典型的政治转嫁难题：任何负责收拾烂摊子的人都必须以极其糟糕的条件撤出战场，因此共和党人巴不得让民主党人来承担结束战争的骂名。对此，佩因给出了衡量历史责任的原则：“事实上在战争问题上，应该去指责那些发动战争的人，那些发动战争的人才是你该谴责的对象，而不是那些去结束战争的人。”
### [01:04:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3865s) 泽连斯基的历史定位与中等强国的制衡
谈及乌克兰总统弗拉基米尔·泽连斯基（Volodymyr Zelenskyy），佩因给予了极高的历史评价，称他毫无疑问是“名垂青史的英雄”（a hero for all time）。她认为泽连斯基展现了一位伟大政治家极为罕见的气魄。主持人回忆起泽连斯基曾亲口提到，战争爆发之初拜登致电表示可以派机协助他撤离基辅，而泽连斯基留下了那句举世皆知的名言：“我不需要搭便车，我需要弹药。”佩因感叹道：
> “他也是一位真正具备沟通才能的人，我实在无法相信我们竟然没有全力支持他。这是你能想象到的最黑白分明、最不加掩饰的侵略战争之一。”——莎拉·佩因（Dr. Sarah Paine）
佩因强调，俄罗斯军队在战场上施加的暴行令人发指，文明世界绝不能任由这股破坏性力量逼近欧洲腹地。眼下的当务之急是让乌克兰彻底站稳脚跟，迫使俄罗斯停止倾泻炮火，同时支持马克龙（Emmanuel Macron）等欧洲中等强国领导人正在积极推动的联合制约机制，在国际舞台上给莫斯科一次深度的“冷静停歇”。
- 泽连斯基拒绝美方撤离提议的名言：“我不需要搭便车，我需要弹药。”（"I don't want a ride. I want ammunition."）
- 佩因将俄乌冲突定性为现代国际法秩序下罕见的、毫无争议的纯粹侵略战争。
### [01:05:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=3952s) 盟友疏离、技术寡头与美利坚民主的内耗
对于国际盟友是否正在远离美国的提问，佩因直言各方正在“逃离”（fleeing）。她以美国在拉美的强权干涉（如针对委内瑞拉马杜罗政权）为例：当世界各国看到美国可以随意推翻他国领袖时，为了防范这种霸凌行为，唯一的选择就是倒向中国，将北京视为“相对不那么疯狂的选项”。美国原本试图将西半球宣布为自身独占的禁脔，实际做法却反将周边国家推向竞争对手。佩因将此总结为实力的诡异悖论：一旦你滥用霸权、随意敲打委内瑞拉或卷入中东战火，所有人都会感到更加不安全，美国的真实影响力反而被自己亲手葬送。
佩因进一步将当前的全球对抗总结为世界秩序之争：究竟是由独裁者主导的、剥夺私产并强征公民充当炮灰的大陆专制帝国获胜，还是保障人均高生活水平与财富创造力的海洋民主体制延续？然而，就在这个决定文明走向的关口，美国社会却陷入了严重的认知错乱：
| 维度 | 美国社会的现实错位 (莎拉·佩因观点) |
|:--- |:--- |
| **移民关注焦点** | 大众过度聚焦于底层个别无证移民的极端犯罪个案 |
| **真正的制度威胁** | 某些外籍技术巨富通过天文数字的资金直接操控美国选举 |
| **典型案例与资金** | 埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）向得克萨斯州政治运作砸入高达 1.6 亿美元 |
| **幕后核心动机** | 逃避更高税收、抗拒社交媒体平台监管以纵容虚假信息泛滥 |
| **选民结构现状** | 三分之一选民支持特朗普，三分之一反对，剩余三分之一弃权“瘫在沙发上” |
佩因愤怒地痛批这些技术寡头，指出得克萨斯州向来有“别惹得州”（Don't mess with Texas）的骄傲格言，如今却任由亿万富翁用金钱左右选举。当主持人指出最近美国社会似乎整体背离了乌克兰时，佩因严正纠正：抛弃乌克兰的是特朗普个人，而不是整个美国。特朗普靠着身家与律师团队屡次在破产后拍拍屁股脱身，但他绝不能代表美国的全部精神底色。佩因疾呼，沉睡在沙发上的三分之一美国选民必须立刻清醒过来，展开深刻的全民自我反思。
### [01:09:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4174s) 错投选票与年轻一代的和平特权
讨论由选民对现状不满的心理切入。许多美国人觉得现有体制无法改善自身处境，因此把票投给那个声称要“掀翻整个棋盘”的政客；然而现实证明，打破一切的后果比原本的糟糕局面还要恶劣。Dr. Sarah Paine 用日常生活中的糟糕披萨打比方：如果自己买到一块难吃的披萨，绝不会打肿脸充胖子到处宣扬它美味，而是会坦率告诉别人这东西极难吃、千万别碰；在政治上也应如此，当选民把票投给一个挑起战争、拖垮经济的领导人时，理应根据现实重新评估，而不是一条路走到黑。人的一生本就是在错误中不断学习，如果一个人到了某个年纪就自以为通晓世间一切真理、拒绝改变认知，那心智状态无异于死亡。
主持人 Steven Bartlett 提到自己刚满 34 岁，作为在特权、稳定与民主秩序中成长的一代，听历史学家发出第三次世界大战的警告时，内心深处甚至很难建立具象化的恐惧——头顶呼啸而过导弹的场景离他们的生活经验太遥远。Dr. Sarah Paine 随即问他，是否愿意去承担 Volodymyr Zelenskyy 脑海中那些不得不直面的惨烈记忆？Zelenskyy 起初也过着普通的世俗生活，未曾见过战火炼狱，但战争降临时，作为国家领导人的他根本没有移开视线的特权。对于在和平西方社会中长大、面对全球动荡容易选择视而不见的年轻人，Dr. Sarah Paine 首先表达了老一辈人的愧疚与歉意：老一代本该为后人留下一个更美好的世界，但现在的美国政府却把局势搞得一团糟。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 战略盲区与战火现实的对比
accDescr: 展示选民因情绪化决策与缺乏战火记忆所形成的认知偏差及其与现实的脱节
subgraph Illusion["特权一代的和平假象"]
A["选民不满现有体制"] --> B["投票给'掀翻棋盘'的政客"]
C["成长于安全民主秩序"] --> D["无法具象化导弹与废墟"]
end
subgraph Reality["残酷地缘现实"]
E["战争爆发与经济衰退"]
F["类似泽连斯基直面战火炼狱"]
end
B -->|"执迷不悟，拒绝复盘"| E
D -->|"远方危机终将波及自身"| F
```
- “If I buy a lousy pizza, I thought it looked really good. I'm not going to go tell you it's a good pizza. I'll tell you it's really lousy. I bought it here. Don't ever touch it.” —— Dr. Sarah Paine 强调面对政治决策的灾难性后果时必须敢于认错和重新评估。
- “What my generation is leaving you is such a mess and you're supposed to make it better for the people who come after.” —— Dr. Sarah Paine 对年轻一代表达歉意，坦言美国目前的所作所为正在让世界加速恶化。
---
### [01:12:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4353s) 信息过载时代的公民责任与概念武器
面对海量负面资讯，年轻群体感到前所未有的心理过载与无力感。互联网将中东战火、乌克兰战局、伊朗危机、加沙惨状、人工智能可能引发的大规模失业、全球变暖导致的林火与洪水同时推到眼前。Dr. Sarah Paine 并不否认这种现实的沉重，但她从人性的角度给出了乐观的解毒剂：在世界各地走动，绝大多数人都是善良美好的，真正拥有黑暗、反社会人格的统治者和阴谋家在总人口中比例极低。只要各行各业的普通人在自己的细分领域各尽其责，人类社会就能挺过危机。作为一名退休学者，她认为自己能贡献的武器就是清晰的“概念”，帮助公众识别虚假信息与欺骗。
在信息战领域，她厘清了普京式政治手腕中的关键机制：普京故意制造并散播恶意伪造的假信息（Disinformation）；当普通公众误信这些谎言并在无意中传播时，就演变成了错误信息（Misinformation）。为了帮助公众穿透政治宣传的迷雾，公民必须履行最基础的责任——终身阅读、跨越信息茧房与偏见进行理性沟通、彼此保持尊重，以及雷打不动地行使投票权。
- “The dark personality types are actually very few in number. And all the rest of us if we all do what we can in our various spheres... we will get through this.” —— Dr. Sarah Paine 鼓励年轻人不要被当下的多重危机击垮。
- 假信息（Disinformation）是有组织、带恶意意图编造的虚假政治叙事；错误信息（Misinformation）是普通受众在不知情状态下的盲目转发与扩散。
---
### [01:13:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4426s) 战争与政治的三层逻辑：战术、战役与战略
为了系统拆解现代军事与政治误区，Dr. Sarah Paine 引入了军事理论中著名的“三个层级”分析框架，并将其无缝投射到当代美国政治中：
1. **战术层级（Tactical Level）**：聚焦于具体的武器与接触，例如一辆坦克的装甲厚度、射程、防御弱点以及操作人员的现场对决；投射到政治上，就是政客的具体攻击手段，比如 Donald Trump 和 JD Vance 在白宫椭圆形办公室对 Volodymyr Zelenskyy 进行羞辱性的采访伏击，或是特朗普阵营无休止地否认 2020 年乔·拜登赢下大选的既成事实。
2. **战役/操作层级（Operational Level）**：聚焦于战役的组织与多兵种协同，比如集中装甲部队与信息战单元去夺取某个具体高地或赢得系列战役；投射到政治上，就是不惜一切代价“赢下眼前这场中期或大选”。共和党建制派目前完全被困在这一层级，他们恐惧一旦抛弃特朗普就会失去选票，结果为了眼前的席位保全，彻底毁掉了政党的机能与后代的未来。
3. **战略层级（Strategic Level）**：这是决定一切的终极层级，核心问题是“我们究竟为何而战？”。对政治领袖而言，最高战略目标必须是维护国家安全与促进国家繁荣。如果在伊朗挑起战事，表面上打着防止核扩散的旗号，实际上却以极度高昂的经济成本刺激了核扩散，同时摧毁了保护子孙后代的盟友体系，那么无论在战术和操作层面取得多少成果，在战略上都是彻底的灾难。
军官与政治投机者往往沉迷于战役操作层面的数字游戏，以为消灭的敌军人数多于自身伤亡就等于赢得了战争。Dr. Sarah Paine 以越南战争为例进行了尖锐反驳：美军在战场上消灭的越盟人数是自身伤亡的数倍，但最终南越政权土崩瓦解，美军输掉了整场战争，这正是操作层面的虚幻胜利掩盖不了战略层面彻底失败的铁证。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: 战争与政治的三层分析架构
accDescr: 展示战术层、操作层与战略层在军事和政治中的映射及优先级关系
subgraph Warfare["军事维度"]
T1["战术层：武器性能/坦克对决"]
O1["操作层：战役协同/夺取高地/杀伤战损比"]
S1["战略层：为何而战/国家安全与繁荣"]
end
subgraph Politics["政治映射"]
T2["战术手段：人身羞辱/选举谎言宣传"]
O2["操作手段：短视连任计算/迎合民粹保席位"]
S2["战略目标：维系同盟体系/保障子孙长远未来"]
end
T1 -.-> T2
O1 -.-> O2
S1 -.-> S2
T1 --> O1 --> S1
T2 -->|"本末倒置将导致系统崩溃"| S2
```
- “At the strategic level for politicians, it should be protecting our national security and promoting national prosperity.” —— Dr. Sarah Paine 指出政治领袖唯一的战略考量标准。
- “Instead, you've killed the party and you've destroyed your children's futures. Who the hell does that? It's focusing on this operational level.” —— Dr. Sarah Paine 痛斥共和党政客为了眼前选举的操作利益而牺牲长远国家战略。
---
### [01:17:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4626s) 破解北约东扩神话与东欧的历史创伤
针对舆论中常有人附和普京说法、声称“北约违背承诺步步紧逼俄罗斯边境才导致战争”的言论，Dr. Sarah Paine 直斥这完全是在复述克里姆林宫的虚假宣传。历史真相截然相反：冷战结束时，根本不是美国拿着大棒到处逼迫东欧国家加入北约，而是前苏联阵营的各国如获大赦般蜂拥涌向北约大门，争先恐后地寻求安全庇护。波兰、捷克斯洛伐克、匈牙利、罗马尼亚、保加利亚等国深知俄罗斯的帝国扩张本性，对苏联时期的残暴统治记忆犹新。
二战结束后，苏联将战时培训的本国意识形态干部空降至保加利亚、罗马尼亚和匈牙利等国，迅速接管了专政核心的“强力部门”：掌管军队的国防部（决定可以枪毙谁）、掌控警察与法庭的内务部（决定逮捕谁入狱）、控制舆论的信息部，以及掌控粮食配给与私有财产流转的农业部。通过掌控这些命脉，莫斯科在整个东欧掀起了残酷的大清洗，肉体消灭和长期监禁其他政党的竞选者与社会领袖。正是这段血泪斑斑的历史，让东欧各国在冷战后竭尽全力寻求加入北约，以此作为阻绝俄罗斯帝国再度吞并的唯一生存屏障。
- “First of all, the United States didn't go around and try and strong-arm everyone and say you must join NATO... Absolutely the opposite. These folks were stampeding to NATO's doors.” —— Dr. Sarah Paine 澄清北约东扩的历史主动权完全来自东欧国家对莫斯科的恐惧。
- 强力部门接管四部曲：二战后莫斯科控制东欧各国的标准模式是依次夺取国防部门、内务与司法部门、信息舆论部门以及农业配给部门，随后展开大规模政治清洗与肉体消灭。
### [01:18:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4736s) 苏联历史阴影与北约东扩的真相
莎拉·佩因（Dr. Sarah Paine）回顾了冷战时期的历史，直指俄罗斯将其侵略行径归咎于“北约东扩”是彻头彻尾的虚假叙事。二战后苏联强行将共产主义体制强加于东欧诸国，当1953年东德民众反抗时，苏军出面残酷镇压；当匈牙利人在1956年试图调整体制时，苏军直接开进坦克并处决了国家领导人，且从未对这些暴行进行忏悔或认错。佩因强调，东欧国家之所以争先恐后寻求加入北约，根本原因在于对俄罗斯深入骨髓的恐惧。她用“半场网球”（half court tennis）来比喻俄罗斯的心态——永远扮演受害者、抱怨全世界都在针对自己，却全然无视自己给邻国造成的深重灾难。
为了说明俄罗斯体制的无能与失败，佩因分享了自己在1988至1989年戈尔巴乔夫执政初期在苏联生活的切身体验。当时整个供应链已处于崩溃边缘，一家大型国营超市里总共只有约77种商品，还不如西方便利店收银台前的一个糖果架丰富。走过肉类柜台时，腐肉散发的恶臭几乎能让人窒息晕厥。市场上任何被贴上“进口”（importnoe）标签的商品都会被一抢而空，因为人们普遍认为“只要是外面来的都比本国生产的强”。佩因回忆自己当时只能靠烂掉的匈牙利苹果熬成苹果酱度日，或者购买罗马尼亚产的番茄罐头。她对比指出，北欧国家守着并不优渥的土地却建成了高度发达繁荣的文明社会，而拥有广袤领土与资源的俄罗斯却只会掠夺邻国、试图将乌克兰人变为杀人凶手的奴隶。
“So, Russia looks at the entire world… They look at it as that everyone else is picking on us instead of excuse me, have you ever threatened other people? Have you ever done anything vaguely naughty to anybody else?” 佩因尖锐地质问道。
- 1953年东德工人起义与1956年匈牙利事件中，苏联依靠坦克镇压并处决他国首脑，至今从未对受害者道歉或反省。
- 佩因亲历1988–1989年莫斯科物资匮乏时期：超市仅有77种商品，肉质腐烂，食品严重依赖东欧卫星国（如匈牙利苹果、罗马尼亚番茄）。
- 佩因呼吁公众坚守诚实与道德常识，并重温美国《独立宣言》的核心精神：保护自己的生命与自由，而非剥夺他人生命或强加意志。
---
### [01:23:03](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4983s) 能源危机真相与特朗普的经济关税乱象
针对主持人提及柴油油价飙升至每加仑6美元、外界传闻特朗普可能与普京达成柴油进口协议的说法，佩因断然驳斥这是毫无根据的政治虚假信息（disinformation）。她指出，俄罗斯根本不具备能够影响全球供需的大规模柴油出口能力。柴油价格飙升的直接导火索是特朗普挑起的伊朗战争，这与各产油国的原油品质等级以及炼油厂的配置密切相关。炼油厂只能处理特定规格的原油，重新改造一套炼油装置需要耗费数百万美元和漫长周期。特朗普试图把通胀的责任推卸给乌克兰战争，完全是在掩盖其外交与军事冒险引发的恶果。
佩因对美国当前的经济政策与物价飞涨表达了强烈愤怒。她走访超市时发现一小盒燕麦片的价格竟然高达10美元，物价在过去两年内急剧恶化。她严厉批评特朗普针对加拿大和墨西哥食品征收惩罚性关税的荒谬举动，认为这不仅是对盟友的背叛，更是直接洗劫普通美国家庭的钱袋子。佩因直言自己原本毫无党派偏见，但如今共和党的所作所为正在透支美国的未来，让几代人承受无法挽回的长期伤害。
“The diesel stuff is absolutely Trump's war's fault. And he's trying to blame Ukraine. It's despicable. As usual, he's lying.” 佩因对特朗普转嫁危机的行径给出了极为严厉的抨击。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 柴油价格暴涨与政治推责链条
accDescr: 展示伊朗战争如何导致炼油与柴油危机，以及白宫推卸责任给乌克兰的因果图。
subgraph Causes["地缘与炼油危机"]
A["特朗普挑起伊朗战争"] --> B["全球特定原油供应受阻"]
B --> C["炼油厂原油等级错配<br/>（改造耗资数百万且耗时长）"]
end
subgraph Impact["市场连锁反应"]
C --> D["柴油价格飙升至 $6/加仑"]
D --> E["全美物流运输成本剧增"]
E --> F["超级市场食品价格飞涨<br/>（如 $10 一盒燕麦）"]
end
subgraph Narrative["政治舆论操弄"]
A -.->|"转嫁危机责任"| G["散布虚假叙事：怪罪乌克兰"]
G -.->|"炮制救市神话"| H["声称与俄罗斯达成柴油协议<br/>（俄缺乏出口能力，纯属欺骗）"]
end
```
---
### [01:25:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5118s) 乌克兰的国防创新与俄罗斯战略炼油体系的崩溃
面对外界有关“失去了美国支持、面对中俄联手，乌克兰必败无疑”的悲观论调，佩因直斥其为无稽之谈。她认为乌克兰目前正在打赢这场保卫战，并且展现出了令人惊叹的自主军工创新能力。乌克兰已经独立研发了多种型号的长程自杀式无人机，并正在迅速部署国产弹道导弹。在无人机袭击中，乌克兰对俄罗斯境内的雅虎/谷歌级基础设施（如 Yandex 数据中心）和关键能源命脉实施了精确外科手术式打击。
在能源战场上，乌克兰凭借本土武器重创了俄罗斯多座炼油厂。由于这些现代化精炼设施极度依赖西方先进零部件与技术，在严厉制裁下俄罗斯根本无力承担修复成本，导致其多达50%的在役炼油产能陷入瘫痪。佩因指出，乌克兰正在成为全球性价比最高的高技术军火供应国，而美国军火工业则因官僚主义与昂贵的单位成本陷入困境。她抨击美国在爱国者防空导弹拦截弹供应上的迟缓，并以二战时期富兰克林·罗斯福（FDR）总统召集工业家强制将航空器产量提高到数万架的战时动员为例，说明当前华盛顿缺乏决断力与战略魄力。
与此同时，佩因批评了埃隆·马斯克对乌克兰“星链”（Starlink）终端设置“紧急切断开关”（kill switch）的短视行为。此举彻底摧毁了国际客户对该系统的信任，导致印度等潜在买家退避三舍，反而促成了法国竞争对手卫星服务商股票的大幅暴涨。
“They're going to be the go-to defense supplier cuz our the stuff in the United States is way too expensive and this Patriot stuff… this is why it's just breathtakingly incompetent.” 佩因针对乌美两国防务产业现状作出了这番对比评价。
- 乌克兰在缺乏外部卫星全面支持的情况下，自主远程打击重创了俄罗斯多达50%的在役炼油厂产能。
- 马斯克在战场关键时刻切断星链引发信任崩盘，直接让欧洲（法国）卫星防务竞争企业的股价大幅攀升。
- 佩因将当前拜登政府的军工拖延同富兰克林·罗斯福在二战初期强势动员工业界扩大产能相提并论，斥责当前拦截弹短缺是战略上的无能。
---
### [01:28:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5280s) 死地求生：为何欧洲绝不会放弃对乌援助
当主持人询问如果欧美外部资金彻底枯竭乌克兰将何去何从时，佩因斩钉截铁地表示，欧洲的资金绝对不会断供。她解释称，欧洲各国深知唇亡齿寒的道理——如果普京在乌克兰得逞，俄军下一个践踏的目标必然是欧洲其他地区。自2022年全面战争爆发以来，欧洲在安全防务上的态度发生了180度根本性逆转，至今没有任何动摇。在普京的扩张模式下，整个欧洲同样被逼入了退无可退的“死地”（Death Ground）。
佩因进一步拆穿了克里姆林宫制造的舆论假象。普京（她戏称为“邪恶小弗拉德” Vlad the Bad）正在动用庞大的国家机器对外释放虚假信息，让外界误以为俄罗斯胜券在握。但现实是，普京的持续战争正在掏空俄罗斯的人口、经济与工业根基。
“I don't think it will from Europe. Why? Because Europe… Russia will be coming for the rest of Europe. It will be coming. They are on death ground too with Putin's little model.” 佩因对欧洲誓死坚守援乌立场的底层逻辑作出了极其清晰的论断。
### [01:28:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5321s) 俄罗斯的战争重负与普京的政治困局
围绕普京的去留与战场士兵的心理临界点展开了分析。Sarah Paine 教授指出，普京身处极大的重压之下，而年轻人早晚会对前线指挥官产生强烈反弹。她强调，当前被派往前线的士兵绝非斯大林时代的消耗品，由于计划生育等人口历史原因，他们很多是家庭中的独生子，“这些奔赴前线的年轻人非常特殊，他们是独生子女。”她发问究竟到了哪一步，前线的年轻人会发起暴动、把枪口对准自己的长官，或者俄罗斯的母亲们会站出来坚决反抗。主持人提到瓦格纳集团首领普里戈任的兵变，认为这正是险些演变为全面哗变的明证。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 俄罗斯高危战时经济的恶性循环
accDescr: 展示了巨额军费开支、劳动力流失对俄罗斯民生和通胀造成的直接冲击。
subgraph 资源消耗与通胀
A["国防预算占比约 40%"] --> B["挤占医疗、教育及基建"]
C["军事动员与技术人才外流"] --> D["劳动力极度短缺"]
D --> E["通胀高企，央行加息超 20%"]
end
subgraph 外部制约与能源打击
F["丢失欧洲能源出口市场"] --> G["3000亿美元央行储备被冻结"]
H["炼油厂遭远程无人机袭击"] --> I["炼油产能暴跌近 50%"]
end
```
谈及俄罗斯所承担的经济代价，Paine 教授列举了一连串触目惊心的数据：俄罗斯经济已转向极高风险的战时体制，其国防开支占到了国家总预算的大约 40%，在人为拉高 GDP 数据的同时，彻底抽空了公共医疗、基础教育和民用基建设施的资金。随着军事动员令下达以及数十万高素质专业技术人员出逃，严重的劳动力匮乏引发了顽固的通货膨胀，迫使俄罗斯央行将基准利率上调至 20% 以上。不仅如此，俄罗斯失去了丰厚的欧洲能源市场，三千亿美元的央行外汇储备被西方冻结，乌克兰远程无人机对炼油设施的持续打击更导致其炼油产能断崖式下跌高达 50%。面对如此损耗，Paine 直截了当地质疑：“这就叫打赢一场战争？我不这么认为。”她补充道，只要普京在位就会把战争推向深渊，而西方唯一的退路，或许就是在暗地里开出安全撤离的通道并附带足够的数十亿美元资产，作为促成普京下台的“退休金计划”。
- 国防开支占比：占俄罗斯国家财政预算的近 40%，重创民生基础
- 货币政策与利率：因人才流失与全面通胀，俄罗斯央行利率被推升至 20% 以上
- 关键资产与产能受损：3000 亿美元外汇储备遭冻结，本土炼油厂产能下降达 50%
---
### [01:31:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5461s) 谁是真正的敌人：大陆帝国对决海洋秩序
讨论转向界定当今世界的根本威胁。当主持人问及“谁是我们的敌人”时，Paine 教授给出了清晰的界定：“大陆主义者。也就是中国和俄罗斯。”她对美国内部的政治退化感到忧心忡忡，痛批特朗普扬言接管加拿大的言论：“这要么是一个极烂的笑话——我认为并非如此，要么这就是唐纳德·特朗普真实的内心写照。”她谴责共和党竟然没有因此将他赶出政坛。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: 海洋秩序与大陆威权制度的对抗机制
accDescr: 展现了自我纠错的海洋民主政体与容易泥足深陷的大陆威权体制的对比。
subgraph 海洋民主模式
A["多党选举与法治"] --> B["承认败选并自我修正"]
B --> C["正和博弈与财富复合增长"]
end
subgraph 大陆威权模式
D["一党高度集权"] --> E["对错误决策加倍下注"]
E --> F["压制青年诉求并走向僵化"]
end
```
在比较政体优劣时，Paine 引用了丘吉尔的名言，指出“民主是最糟糕的政府形式，但所有其他替代方案除外”。民主制度虽然混乱且充斥着旷日持久的争吵，但却拥有纠错能力；而像习近平这样的独裁领袖虽然自诩体制高效有序，其实质却是“加倍押注错误决策，并在一条道上走到黑，时间越久局势越糟糕”。由于缺乏纠错机制，中国年轻人正普遍陷入不满。相比之下，健康的制度必须基于多党竞争、服从选举结果、在下一次竞选里继续争取，并持续制定更加公正平等的法律框架。
---
### [01:32:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5536s) 后普京时代的俄罗斯权力真空与“散落核武”危机
当被问及普京死后俄罗斯是否可能走向民主时，Paine 明确否定了短期内的这种可能性。她指出，俄罗斯民众并不反对占领乌克兰，他们只是反感战争的高昂代价和失去孩子的痛苦：“我从未听说有大批俄罗斯人认为乌克兰不属于他们。”因此，普京离去绝不会带来规范的民主选举，反而会触发一场凶狠残酷的全面厮杀（free-for-all）。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 俄罗斯独裁权力崩塌示意图
accDescr: 描绘了黑手党式集权结构在核心死亡后陷入派系混战并导致体制解体。
A["核心教父：普京 (Vlad the Bad)"] --> B["核心幕僚 (Consiglieri)"]
B --> C["下层执行网络与寡头利益集团"]
D["普京身故/体制瓦解"] --> E["数百万受过军事训练的人员站队"]
E --> F["长达约10年的混乱碎片化状态 ('矮胖子' Humpty Dumpty 困局)"]
```
Paine 将普京的统治架构形容为黑手党式的金字塔家族体系：“顶层是‘恶人弗拉德’（Vlad the Bad），他就像黑手党教父，底下有一帮参谋幕僚（consiglieri），幕僚下面又有他们的马仔。”一旦核心教父倒台，无人知晓谁将登顶。加之眼下大量俄罗斯人刚刚接受过正规军事训练，这些人会追随谁将成为巨大变数，国家随时面临爆发内战的危险。Paine 用童话人物“矮胖子”（Humpty Dumpty）来比喻这种跌得粉碎的局面：“把摔碎的矮胖子重新拼凑完整需要漫长的时间。就这些独裁体制而言，根据破裂的严重程度，我随便报个数字——需要十年。”
她提醒西方民主阵营必须未雨绸缪，如同准备作战计划一样，提前为各大独裁者的死亡备好预案。她指出苏联解体时最可怕的噩梦就是“散落的核武器”（loose nukes），而当年乌克兰正是因为得到了英美的安全保证才交出核武库。如今西方一旦背弃承诺，信誉将荡然无存；如果特朗普让乌克兰被出卖，“这意味着他对乌克兰根本没有任何筹码，一切都完了。”
- 制度空白：缺乏独立的计票和选举信任基础，无法平稳过渡
- 军事变数：大批拥有实战和军旅经验的退伍群体面临派系站队
- 崩盘修复周期：强人倒台后的社会与政治整合预计至少需要 10 年
- 核武风险：若发生动乱，散落核武库（loose nukes）将再次威胁全球安全
---
### [01:35:55](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5755s) 海洋秩序的正和法则与新疆历史诱因
谈及当前全球最重要却被忽视的议题，Paine 强调了海权地缘体系与正和博弈的绝对价值。她指出战争是极度迅速消耗财富的负和博弈，唯有海洋秩序是无限游戏的正和博弈：“大约 90% 的全球贸易都依赖这些海洋通道，这是连接万物的原始网络。”一艘大型集装箱货轮可以运送 21,000 个集装箱，而一列货运火车充其量只能拉 600 个，海洋航运的经济效率无可替代。
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: 国际组织迭代升级路径
accDescr: 当现有国际机构失效时，通过建设平行组织逐步完成外交核心的转移。
A["现有国际机构（如联合国）运行受阻"] --> B["建立更高效的平行国际机制"]
B --> C["各国外交中心逐步由纽约向新机制转移"]
```
Paine 进而探讨了中国在新疆的民族政策其背后的历史动机。她披露，习近平在 2012 年上台后，次年便紧急召集苏联问题专家，深入复盘“苏联到底是如何崩溃的”，因为中共绝不想步苏共的后尘。专家给出的核心结论是：苏联是按照民族划分加盟共和国的，虽然中央派俄罗斯人掌权、让少数民族充当二号人物，并资助各民族语言词典、民俗舞蹈和传统刺绣，但在国家解体时，这一体制却让整个帝国轻而易举地沿着民族边界彻底碎裂。Paine 认为，正是这种对政权解体的深入恐惧，促使习近平对穆斯林少数群体推行了严酷的集中营同化政策，将成年男性关进集中营，并将儿童强行送入寄宿学校，“这无异于文化灭绝。”
- 航运效率悬殊：一艘大型集装箱船载运量达 21,000 箱，而陆上火车仅约 600 箱
- 海洋贸易基石：全球约 90% 的物资流通依赖海洋水路进行
- 治藏治疆的苏联诱因：2013 年中共高层复盘苏联解体教训，判定苏联“民族联邦制”是导致其碎裂瓦解的体制根源
### [01:38:14](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5894s) 同化政策与学术讲座系列
访谈接续上一段有关人口与同化政策的讨论。Dr. Sarah Paine 指出，某些政权试图强行抚养少数族裔的孩子，使其成为“名誉汉人”（honorary Han），类似于过去历史上将其他族裔同化为“名誉白人”的极端做法；同时，由于中国适龄生育女性面临短缺，女性群体也面临着被强制支配或剥削的困境。
随后，主持人 Steven Bartlett 转换话题，由衷赞赏 Dr. Paine 撰写的众多经典历史与战略著作，并向听众推荐她在线上公开的高质量系列讲座。主持人起初口误提到讲座有 14 集，Dr. Paine 随即笑着纠正了讲座的具体编排结构：
“No, there's seven. Well, there are other things that people have posted. It would be the Sarah Paine lecture series. And you can see the logos on top. They have this kind of look to them. And they start with zero and then they go 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 and then there's finale. So there are nine total.”
- **讲座编排**：以“0”作为先导开篇，正文共分为第 1 至第 7 讲，最后附带一集总结篇（Finale），全套完整的官方系列讲座总计为 9 讲。
- **推荐渠道**：视频下方简介提供了 Dr. Paine 在美国海军战争学院（U.S. Naval War College）及其他学术平台录制的系列讲座直达链接。
---
### [01:39:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=5942s) 冷战童年与研究俄中历史的学术初衷
主持人询问 Dr. Paine，一生致力于深耕地缘政治与大国历史，如今看到毕生研究的课题成为全球舆论风暴的核心，内心究竟有何体会。Dr. Paine 回忆起自己年轻时的求学初衷。她坦言，在比主持人更年轻的年纪，她就下定决心要去弄清楚俄罗斯和中国的历史与战略运作，并且深知这将是一场耗费数十年的漫长学术长跑。
促使她走上这条道路的，正是她童年所经历的历史巨变。Dr. Paine 生于 1957 年，那一年人类历史上第一颗人造卫星斯普特尼克（Sputnik）升空，苏联将一只名叫莱卡（Laika）的流浪犬送上了这趟注定无法返航的单程太空之旅。这一事件在当时的美国引发了巨大震动与恐慌，因为这意味着苏联未来完全有能力制造飞抵美国本土的洲际弹道导弹，而美国当时在航天与火箭技术上明显处于落后劣势。Dr. Paine 总结道：
“And the United States was terrified because this meant that the Russians could eventually have ballistic missiles coming after us. And we were behind on all of that. And that's when the Cold War. So you could argue, you can pick your year when you think the height of the Cold War would be, but that might be one of them.”
在那样的时代背景下成长，周围所有人都在将苏联称为“邪恶帝国”，这激发了她强烈的求知欲与好奇心。伴随着幼年时期目睹越战的残酷爆发与糟糕结局，她更加渴望探求战争与大国博弈背后的深层动力，最终投身于国际关系与帝国扩张史的研究。
---
### [01:40:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=6012s) 压轴提问：政客的责任与后代的未来
按照《The Diary Of A CEO》节目的传统惯例，上一位接受采访的嘉宾会给下一位未知的嘉宾留下一个盲盒问题。主持人揭晓了留给 Dr. Paine 的问题：“什么会让你动容落泪（What makes you emotional）？”
听到问题后，Dr. Paine 先是轻呼了一声“Oh no”，沉思片刻后给出了极为沉重而真挚的回答——是“悲伤”（Sorrow）。她表示，最让自己无法释怀的是目睹世人的苦难，特别是那些无辜受害的孩子们：
“Watching sorrow. Watching other people suffering, watching children suffering. Why should they? We have adults that are willing to allow tremendous numbers of children to suffer.”
Dr. Paine 随后将这种痛心转化为对现实政治家的严厉批判。她再次直指以美国共和党为代表的政坛力量，痛斥许多政客只知捞取政治资本和个人利益（grifting），却毫无长远眼光：
“Like go back to the Republicans. You need to make it better for children for the generations that follow. So you lose the next election. Do the right thing. It's past due.”
她大声疾呼，决策者哪怕冒着输掉下一次选举的风险，也必须选择去做正确的事情，停止向那些奉行领土扩张与霸权的陆权主义政权（continentalists）妥协退让。在她看来，没有任何事物能够比下一代的未来更加崇高。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: 对政治领导层的终极呼吁
accDescr: 展现从历史同理心到政治家责任的历史学家诉求链条
subgraph Empathy["情感根基"]
A["目睹人间疾苦与无辜孩童受难"]
end
subgraph Critiques["政治现状批判"]
B["沉溺于政党私利与政治捞钱 (Grifting)"]
C["对大陆扩张主义政权妥协姑息"]
end
subgraph Duty["政治家的历史责任"]
D["宁可牺牲选票，也要做正确之事"]
E["遏制陆权霸权，捍卫全球秩序"]
F["为下一代营造安全与繁荣的未来"]
end
A --> Duty
Critiques -->|"亟待摒弃"| Duty
B -.-> D
C -.-> E
D --> F
E --> F
```
对谈在此高潮中走向尾声，主持人向 Dr. Sarah Paine 的倾囊相授与深刻洞见致以谢意，并在节目片尾向观众推荐算法匹配的延伸深度访谈内容。
## Notable quotes
> [15:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=941s) Pivotal error is once you've made it, the choices that you had before, they're a lot better than ones you have now. And you never get the old ones back. — Dr. Sarah Paine
> [01:13:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=4426s) At the strategic level for politicians, it should be protecting our national security and promoting national prosperity. — Dr. Sarah Paine
> [17:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=1035s) The rules-based order was always based on norms of following them and the US legal order was based on norms of everyone more or less following them. — Dr. Sarah Paine
> [09:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U&t=578s) Type B American hubris, which applies to some of the tech bros, is just because you're really good at something doesn't make you really good at everything. — Dr. Sarah Paine
## Mentioned
Sarah Paine, Steven Bartlett, Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Xi Jinping, Pete Hegseth, Jim Mattis, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Helmut Kohl, George H. W. Bush, Nicholas II, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Benjamin Netanyahu, Mark Carney, Mao Zedong, Emmanuel Macron, Elon Musk, JD Vance, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Yevgeny Prigozhin, Winston Churchill, Mikhail Gorbachev, The Diary Of A CEO, U.S. Naval War College, Pipedrive, Boncharge, Starlink, Yandex, NATO, JCPOA, ICE
## Video description
Are escalating geopolitical tensions hurtling humanity towards World War III? Dr. Sarah Paine highlights the historical roots of geopolitical conflicts and demonstrates how shifting away from a rules-based maritime order guarantees economic collapse.
Dr. Sarah Paine is a renowned geopolitical strategist, historian, and retired professor from the U.S. Naval War College, specializing in Russian and Chinese imperial history and maritime strategy. She applies historical models such as the Peloponnesian War and World War II to decode the actions of leaders like Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping.
*In this episode, she explains:*
■ *The Maritime vs. Continental Divide:* How the world is split between maritime powers compounding wealth through free trade and continental empires burning wealth through territorial conquest.
■ *The Cost of Isolationism:* Why sudden, aggressive tariffs and the abandonment of key international alliances rapidly accelerate inflation, shrink global influence, and destabilize the U.S. economy.
■ *The Death Ground Principle:* How threatening an adversary's very existence removes all their strategic alternatives, transforming struggling nations into highly lethal, unyielding military opponents.
■ *The Illusion of Dictatorial Stability:* Why the lack of a peaceful transition of power in dictatorships guarantees that the death of a leader like Putin will trigger profound, unpredictable instability and violent internal power struggles.
■ *The Power of Negative Objectives:* Why a government's most vital job goes completely unnoticed, focusing on preventing catastrophic disasters before they happen rather than chasing highly publicized achievements.
00:00:00 Intro
00:02:01 How Did the World Get So Close to World War III?
00:04:59 Was the Iran War a Catastrophic Mistake?
00:07:01 Where the Trump Administration Went Wrong
00:09:12 Putin's Biggest Mistake in the Russia-Ukraine War
00:17:15 Should America Stop Fighting Other Countries' Wars?
00:20:07 Why Americans Are Tired of Paying for Foreign Wars
00:21:12 The Deadly Military Strategy of Death Ground
00:24:45 How Rising Gas Prices Could Affect Your Future
00:26:57 Will Ukraine Seek Revenge Against Russia?
00:30:48 What Happens Next in Putin's Russia?
00:37:26 What Would Happen if Putin Stepped Down?
00:40:15 The Real Reason China Is Backing Russia
00:41:18 What Would It Take to End the War in Ukraine?
00:43:15 Why Europe's Economy Is Under Pressure
00:45:26 How the US Tax System Shapes America's Future
00:50:15 Why the US Midterm Elections Could Change Everything
00:50:24 Ads
00:52:23 What's Happening to the Democratic Party's Core Voters?
00:55:44 What Happens to the World if Nothing Changes?
01:01:54 How Will History Remember Volodymyr Zelensky?
01:04:28 Why the World May Be Turning Away From America
01:05:55 Why People Unaffected by War Should Pay Attention
01:10:34 The 3 Levels of Warfare That Shape Every Conflict
01:13:46 Is NATO Expansion Really Threatening Russia?
01:17:30 What Would a Trump-Putin Deal Mean for Ukraine?
01:23:40 Can Ukraine Actually Defeat Russia?
01:25:49 Who Is the Real Enemy in Today's Global Conflicts?
01:32:04 Could Russia Ever Become a True Democracy?
01:32:50 What Happens to Russia After Putin Dies?
01:34:03 The Global Crises We Can't Afford to Ignore
*Follow Dr. Sarah Paine:*
Website - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/rO7WS9
_•Articles_
_•Lecture series_
_•Research Contributions_
_•Publications_
Books
_The Japanese Empire: Grand Strategy from the Meiji Restoration to the Pacific War_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/GXnzc4Q
_The Wars for Asia, 1911–1949_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/69v4VIT
_The Sino-Japanese War of 1894–1895: Perceptions, Power, and Primacy_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/1RVXdGi
_Imperial Rivals: China, Russia, and Their Disputed Frontier, 1858–1924_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/9ZCr1CC
Edited Books
_The Routledge Handbook of the Second World War in the Pacific_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/8lf26P1
_The Strategy of Sanctions: From Antiquity to the 21st Century (free download)_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/7u2V1tu
_Deterrence and Denial: The Power of Fleets in Being_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/AMFaHy9
_Nation Building, State Building and Economic Development_ - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/6NGx1Y3
*The Diary Of A CEO:*
◼ Join DOAC circle here - https://doaccircle.com/
◼ Buy The Diary Of A CEO book here - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/BWjLTZK
◼ Shop The Diary Of A CEO collection: https://thediary.com/collections/shop
◼ Get email updates - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/5IB1H6E
◼ Follow Steven - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/AGU9QP4
◼ DOAC Bookshelf - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/BBnuCf6
*Sponsors:*
Pipedrive - https://pipedrive.com/CEO
Bon Charge: https://boncharge.com/DOAC for 20% off
Function Health - https://functionhealth.com/DOAC
[Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kuNW8hRc2U)
Source quotes
[15:41] Dr. Sarah Paine: Pivotal error is once you've made it, the choices that you had before, they're a lot better than ones you have now. And you never get the old ones back.
[73:46] Dr. Sarah Paine: At the strategic level for politicians, it should be protecting our national security and promoting national prosperity.
[17:15] Dr. Sarah Paine: The rules-based order was always based on norms of following them and the US legal order was based on norms of everyone more or less following them.
[9:38] Dr. Sarah Paine: Type B American hubris, which applies to some of the tech bros, is just because you're really good at something doesn't make you really good at everything.
Source quotes
[37:26] Dr. Sarah Paine: Oh, well, that's the thing about dictatorships is they seem eternal until the day they shatter and then it's impossible to predict.
[23:56] Dr. Sarah Paine: If I have an unlimited objective against you, I'm putting you on death ground. What does that mean? It means if you don't fight, I'm going to just come kill you.
[43:15] Dr. Sarah Paine: It is far better to deploy your diplomats and lawyers to international institutions. Sure, the deal isn't perfect for what you wish you had gotten, but the wealth will compound
[4:34] Dr. Sarah Paine: And so governments don't actually get credit for what they do because on a normal day it's normal.
Original transcript
[0:00] We're potentially barreling our way into
[0:02] a world war and it looks like World War
[0:04] II. And once wars start, it's really
[0:07] hard to stop them. But we have reckless
[0:09] people running some very large and
[0:12] important countries around the world and
[0:14] they're all lying about it. And here's
[0:16] the problem with normalizing lies. The
[0:19] Soviet Union collapsed in large part
[0:21] because it was built on lies. and you
[0:23] might be one of the most knowledgeable
[0:25] people that I think I've ever spoken to
[0:26] on the subject of World War II, but I
[0:28] don't know what going on.
[0:30] >> So, history's moving really fast. It's
[0:32] like the log jams busted and we don't
[0:34] know which way it's going to go and it's
[0:36] tremendously frightening. Putin decided
[0:38] to kick over the chess board by invading
[0:40] Ukraine. Donald Trump decided to get
[0:42] into a recreational war in Iran. And
[0:44] this war has trashed the US economy. It
[0:47] has blown the US alliance system, but it
[0:49] also has the collateral damage of taking
[0:51] down the world's economy. And this is
[0:54] the problem with having these dark
[0:56] personalities running countries like
[0:58] Putin. He doesn't care how many people
[1:00] he kills. These people are historically
[1:02] unqualified.
[1:03] >> But Trump has made a deal with Putin for
[1:05] diesel exports.
[1:07] >> Oh, this is disinformation. Russia has
[1:09] no capacity to export diesel in
[1:12] sufficient quantities to make any
[1:14] difference whatsoever. As usual, he's
[1:16] lying.
[1:17] >> Trump's not going to back out of Iran.
[1:18] It doesn't sound like Putin's going to
[1:20] back out of Ukraine.
[1:21] >> They're going to go forever.
[1:22] >> If we continue on the direction of
[1:24] travel we're on now, what does the
[1:25] future look like?
[1:26] >> Well, you've got to prevent these things
[1:28] from breaking out because once they
[1:30] break out, then things are really over.
[1:32] So, I can give you concepts. Here we go.
[1:36] >> Before this episode starts, I have a
[1:38] small favor to ask you. 2 months ago,
[1:39] 61% of the people that watched this
[1:41] channel weren't subscribed. And we're
[1:42] now down to 58%. My goal is 50%. So, if
[1:46] you've ever liked any of the videos
[1:47] we've made on this channel, if you like
[1:48] this channel, can you do me a small
[1:49] quick favor and hit the subscribe
[1:51] button? It helps this channel more than
[1:52] you know. And the bigger the channel
[1:53] gets, the more we can invest in the
[1:55] guests and the production. Thank you and
[1:56] enjoy this episode.
[2:01] Dr. Sarah Payne, you might be one of the
[2:06] most knowledgeable people that I think
[2:08] I've ever spoken to on the subjects
[2:09] we're going to speak about today. and
[2:11] they are subjects that I think are
[2:12] incredibly timely based on everything
[2:15] that's going on in the world. What I see
[2:17] is war over here, war over here,
[2:18] conflict over here, Putin invading this
[2:20] place, Trump's gone into Iran. What I
[2:23] see on the streets of Paris, where we
[2:24] were yesterday, is rioting, and I see
[2:26] disorder. Um, but I don't know where
[2:29] what the first domino that fell that
[2:31] caused everything that we're seeing now,
[2:33] um, occurred or what the sort of
[2:35] background context is. So, I'm going to
[2:37] ask you, where does this all start?
[2:39] Well, history doesn't start. It's a long
[2:41] continuum. But I'll try on some concepts
[2:43] that might be helpful. The way countries
[2:47] used to organize themselves and often
[2:49] they were empires uh was by land was a
[2:52] currency of power. So the continentalist
[2:55] world is all about taking territory for
[2:57] others, right? And when you're doing
[2:59] that, you're burning wealth because
[3:01] you've watched it in all these places.
[3:04] Then later an alternate possibility
[3:08] came. It originated from maritime powers
[3:11] but ultimately it becomes a maritime
[3:14] world order which is something
[3:15] different. Britain is a maritime power
[3:18] but then you get to the industrial
[3:20] revolution where suddenly you can
[3:22] compound wealth and that's a gamecher
[3:25] because it changes the currency of power
[3:28] which formerly in that continental world
[3:30] I've just described it's all about land.
[3:33] It's changing the currency of power to
[3:35] industry, commerce, and trade. That if
[3:38] you do those things, you get compounded
[3:40] wealth. And with that, you can buy your
[3:42] armies or do whatever uh you want. And
[3:44] then the maritime order is about
[3:47] compounding wealth from just having
[3:50] universal rules. Like you've been
[3:52] traveling all over, your little piece of
[3:54] plastic works everywhere, right? That's
[3:56] based on rules-based order. And then
[3:58] you've got a small company and you
[4:00] operate in various countries. Um, no
[4:02] one's taking you down for your money
[4:03] that you're making, right? All your
[4:05] transactions are working across the
[4:06] world. This is the rules-based order. If
[4:09] it goes away, the billionaires who've
[4:12] been funneling their money into the
[4:14] continentalists,
[4:16] their world will disappear too. They
[4:19] will become casualties of it. And then
[4:21] when I think about what's important on
[4:23] this planet, it would be you, the young.
[4:26] Like, please tell me what is more
[4:28] important in the generations that
[4:30] follow. Just tell me what is it?
[4:33] Nothing.
[4:34] >> Are you concerned about the next
[4:35] generation?
[4:36] >> Yeah.
[4:36] >> Why?
[4:37] >> We're potentially barreling our way into
[4:39] a world war. We have reckless people
[4:42] running some very large and important
[4:45] countries around the world. And as
[4:47] you've noticed, once wars start, easy to
[4:50] do that part. Really hard to end them.
[4:53] Why? Because whoever's losing doesn't
[4:55] want to lose. So they keep doubling down
[4:57] long after they've lost.
[4:59] >> He made a comment there. You said you
[5:00] think we're sort of barreling towards a
[5:02] world war. People, you know, have
[5:05] probably said that every year for the
[5:07] since World War II.
[5:08] >> Ah, do you have negative and positive
[5:10] objectives here? Ah, yeah. Here we go.
[5:12] Negative and positive objectives. So, a
[5:16] positive objective if you make something
[5:17] happen like I don't know, I want to
[5:20] snatch Maduro and put him in a New York
[5:23] prison. We can verify that the guy's in
[5:26] a New York prison. You snatched him.
[5:28] That's a positive objective. A negative
[5:30] objective would be preventing something
[5:31] from happening. And how can you prove
[5:35] how many times a world war was avoided
[5:37] in the last whatever years? You can't.
[5:40] And it's also controversial, right, on
[5:42] deterrence cuz you can say, "Ah, I've
[5:44] invested in whatever it is and this has
[5:46] deterred everybody." Then it's prove it.
[5:48] Well, you can't prove it. And yet, the
[5:51] example I use as a parent, if you have a
[5:53] little kid, a lot of it's negative
[5:55] objectives. preventing the little kid
[5:57] from getting run over. You hold their
[5:59] hand on the street. If you're living in
[6:00] New York, how many times in a day just
[6:02] walking up the street did you save that
[6:04] child's life because you were hanging on
[6:06] to their hand before they, you know,
[6:08] took off in front of c into traffic. So
[6:10] negative objectives are incredibly
[6:13] important. And since I'm on this topic,
[6:16] governments, I believe, are primarily
[6:18] about negative objectives. Preventing
[6:20] disasters. So disaster number one would
[6:22] be like foreign invasion. But other
[6:24] things preventing bridges from
[6:25] collapsing. We inspect them. Preventing
[6:28] all kinds of mal practice across
[6:30] professions. We license people. Having
[6:32] everyone be illiterate. You have you
[6:34] have education. And so governments don't
[6:36] actually get credit for what they do
[6:39] because on a normal day it's normal. So
[6:41] you think well my government hasn't done
[6:43] anything for me lately. Untrue. And that
[6:46] applies here to the idea that you know
[6:50] people have probably through history
[6:51] said that there was going to be a war a
[6:52] lot. And so is there particular writing
[6:56] on the wall at this moment in the
[6:57] timeline?
[6:58] >> Yeah.
[6:58] >> What is writing on the wall?
[7:00] >> Well, the Iran war is probably one of
[7:03] the most incompetent wars in human
[7:05] history.
[7:06] >> Was that a mistake?
[7:07] >> Well, yeah. Let's do some concepts of
[7:10] how to analyze that.
[7:11] >> Okay. One is in a war, if you're doing
[7:14] it right, if you really must have a war,
[7:16] you put all the costs on the person
[7:19] you're fighting and then you minimize
[7:20] costs yourself. Well, this war has
[7:23] trashed the US economy. It has blown the
[7:26] US alliance system. Yes, Iran is hurting
[7:29] without a doubt, but it is also has the
[7:32] collateral damage of taking down the
[7:34] world's economy. So this now transforms
[7:38] the United States to an annoyance to
[7:41] just about everyone's primary adversary
[7:43] for threatening their economies. That's
[7:45] breathtakingly incompetent.
[7:46] >> What was the misunderstanding?
[7:48] >> I'm not privy to the decision making. So
[7:52] let's do another thing about assessment.
[7:55] This is when you do an assessment before
[7:57] you even do a war, you need to look at
[8:00] not just my strengths and if you're the
[8:03] if you're Iran, your weaknesses, which
[8:05] clearly that was part of the assessment.
[8:07] We're strong. We figured all that out,
[8:08] but also your strengths and my
[8:10] weaknesses. Oh, and plus all the other
[8:13] people who might be interested and
[8:15] clearly that was absent. Or the people
[8:18] who should have been saying, "Hey, the
[8:19] first thing they're going to do is shut
[8:20] down Hormuz weren't there." Right? It's
[8:24] like a hot water bottle. If you cook
[8:25] that thing, it means anybody who lives
[8:28] there who doesn't have an alternate
[8:30] coastline cannot get things out by sea.
[8:33] Does that make sense?
[8:35] >> Narrow seas in wartime easy to shut
[8:37] down. Ukraine shut down the Black Sea.
[8:39] These places close down in wartime
[8:41] because between shore artillery and
[8:43] mines and other stuff, things don't
[8:45] move. So when the United States had its
[8:48] big base in Yeah. Bahrain was that's
[8:50] where the big medaval base is. Okay.
[8:52] Hey, how are we going to get to the
[8:53] naval base? I don't think so. So then
[8:57] where are we going to go? Oh, we're
[8:59] going to have to go to Diego Garcia.
[9:01] That base would be 2,500 miles away and
[9:04] that little base is like in the middle
[9:06] of nowhere. That would be a mess.
[9:07] >> And this is why I asked the question
[9:08] about the misunderstanding because you'd
[9:10] think lots of smart people that the
[9:11] White House would have figured out.
[9:12] >> You're talking first Trump
[9:14] administration when there was a guy
[9:16] named General Mattis around. We now have
[9:19] Major Pete.
[9:21] And Major Pete is really good at
[9:23] identifying uh blacks and women and
[9:25] firing them. I mean, great Pete. That's
[9:30] And now they're doing testing on
[9:32] testosterone. I kid you not. And uh I
[9:35] don't know if you remember when you're
[9:36] an adolescent when testosterone's
[9:38] peaking. If you think there's a
[9:39] correlation with that and your greatest
[9:40] reasoning powers, I don't know. All
[9:43] right. Good luck with it, Major Pete. So
[9:46] these people are not they're
[9:47] historically unqualified for a job. That
[9:50] makes them profoundly dangerous. They've
[9:52] undermined the futures of their own
[9:53] children and they're undermining the
[9:55] prospects for the Republican party which
[9:58] they care about.
[9:59] >> What do you think they thought was going
[10:00] to happen?
[10:00] >> How do I know? I'll give you another
[10:02] thought about just generics. What I call
[10:04] type A and type B American hubris. Type
[10:07] A American hubris is all decisions in
[10:09] the world that matter, they happen in
[10:11] the United States. Okay, good luck with
[10:13] that one. And the second one, uh, type B
[10:16] American hubris, which applies to some
[10:18] of the tech, uh, bros, is just because
[10:21] you're really good at something doesn't
[10:23] make you really good at everything. And
[10:25] you need to have the humility to
[10:27] understand the limits of your expertise
[10:29] and when you need to listen to others.
[10:32] And another piece of it is listening to
[10:35] divergent opinion. So I can't find my
[10:38] blind spots, but maybe you can. And it's
[10:41] really important to talk across
[10:43] political divides. But this what's going
[10:45] on now is just straight up yesmen. And
[10:49] they've committed pivotal errors. They
[10:51] have permanently damaged US national
[10:53] security.
[10:54] >> It's the first time in my life that I've
[10:55] heard of a US president start talking
[10:57] about taking other people's countries.
[11:00] It's almost like Trump was talking about
[11:02] taking Venezuela.
[11:03] >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. He's continentalist.
[11:05] >> Mr. He's a He's a real estate guy.
[11:07] >> Yeah. He sees real estate. He was saying
[11:09] he was going to take Canada, make it the
[11:12] 51st state, I think. And then he
[11:14] thought, Iran would be a walk in the
[11:16] park, that he would behead the leader,
[11:18] the people would rise up. I mean, this
[11:19] is what they said.
[11:20] >> Yeah. Yeah. Um, what's fascinating if
[11:23] you study So there's another one, what I
[11:26] call halfcourt tennis. Halfcourt tennis,
[11:29] you're only looking if you're America
[11:30] and team America and you just you cross
[11:33] at the net and you aren't even looking
[11:34] at things, right? And let's talk about
[11:37] football. And I don't care whether it's
[11:38] American or European football, works
[11:40] either way. That those who are real
[11:43] football enthusiasts, they know not only
[11:45] about the home team, but they know about
[11:47] all the teams, right? All the major
[11:48] ones. And you all you know about the
[11:50] players, too. This is a recreational
[11:52] sport. And then in foreign policy,
[11:56] you're not studying the other side. And
[11:59] I don't know if um you've seen Iran's
[12:02] Lego videos. Oh, you need to on the
[12:05] plane trip back, you need to look at
[12:07] Iran's Lego videos.
[12:08] >> Oh, where they're taking the piss out of
[12:10] America.
[12:10] >> They're Yeah, they're taking these
[12:11] little Lego characters. What they
[12:13] demonstrate is the Iranians have a deep
[12:15] understanding of Americans, whereas
[12:17] Americans don't know up from down on
[12:20] what's going on. Here's another maybe a
[12:23] concept that'll help.
[12:25] Situation of problem in life. There are
[12:29] certain things that as desirable as they
[12:32] are are just not attainable.
[12:35] Right? It would be great if everyone on
[12:37] the planet was a multi-millionaire,
[12:39] right? It's not feasible. And if you're
[12:42] going after an unfeasible objective,
[12:46] you're going to overextend yourself.
[12:48] It's going to have a very bad ending to
[12:50] it. A problem is something that maybe
[12:52] you can solve. And the United States,
[12:56] the greatest generation, understood that
[12:59] the Soviet Union lethal threat, but you
[13:01] couldn't solve it, right? You try to
[13:04] solve that and it'll be the nuclear end
[13:06] to all of us. And so then what you're
[13:08] into is managing it. And then you use
[13:11] various uh elements of national power.
[13:14] One of them was sanctions so that you're
[13:16] going to depress Soviet growth. And then
[13:19] unlike now where we're tariffing
[13:21] everybody, crazy land, what you're
[13:23] trying to do is maximize the growth
[13:25] within your alliance system. So for
[13:27] those who behave, you want to maximize
[13:28] their growth. Those who can't behave,
[13:30] you want to minimize theirs so that over
[13:32] time the relative threat diminishes over
[13:35] time. Does not solve it. And then you're
[13:37] also trying to get accurate information
[13:39] out. Uh not propaganda, but accurate
[13:42] information hoping that an in
[13:44] generational change that maybe the other
[13:46] side reassesses. And if they don't,
[13:47] you're perfectly safe behind the castle
[13:49] walls and you're handling this thing at
[13:51] affordable costs because the sanctions
[13:53] are really costing them much more than
[13:54] you're costing you a problem. If you can
[13:57] if you can figure it out, by all means
[13:59] solve it. But we're trying to solve
[14:01] Iran.
[14:02] There are 90 million of them.
[14:05] All right. Now, to give you some data on
[14:07] how to understand this, because I was
[14:09] trying to figure it out, Nazi Germany,
[14:12] and it had extended borders. It's not
[14:14] just what Germany is today. It's
[14:16] probably includes Austria and other
[14:18] things. It had a population I think of
[14:20] about 80 million is in Iran like 90
[14:22] million. I think the occupation force as
[14:24] best I can tell and I'll defer to some
[14:27] World War II his historian tells me I'm
[14:28] wrong is about 1.5 million was the
[14:32] occupation force after World War II just
[14:35] to occupy Germany. But that's not taking
[14:37] into account all the millions of people
[14:39] coming from Russia everywhere else. So
[14:42] when you're talking Iran equivalent
[14:44] size, it's not feasible. And like why
[14:46] would you want to do it? They're a bunch
[14:48] of Iranians.
[14:49] You want to contain the the nuclear
[14:53] thing at affordable cost. And that was
[14:54] the the Obama deal, right? That was all
[14:59] the permanent members of the the uh UN
[15:01] Security Council signed on to that and
[15:03] the EU. They thought it was the best
[15:05] they can do. had this really intrusive
[15:07] inspection system to get Iran to dial
[15:10] back its nuclear capabilities. Was it
[15:12] perfect? No. But it was feasible and it
[15:15] mitigated the threat to make it
[15:17] bearable. Now, what's the lesson for
[15:19] Iran?
[15:21] What do you suppose the lesson is for
[15:22] everybody now
[15:24] called get a nuke, right? With these
[15:27] wars, it's like if you don't have one,
[15:29] you're toast.
[15:31] We have incentivized proliferation. uh
[15:34] Putin with his war initially and then us
[15:36] with this Iran thing. It's it's
[15:38] profoundly self-defeating.
[15:41] >> You referred to it as a pivotal error,
[15:43] which is another one of your uh
[15:44] >> Yeah. Okay.
[15:45] >> your concepts.
[15:46] >> Well, I think that these concepts, the
[15:49] reason for doing it is you can use them
[15:51] for other things. All right. Pivotal
[15:54] error is once you've made it, the
[15:58] choices that you had before, they're a
[16:01] lot better than ones you have now. and
[16:03] you never get the old ones back. So you
[16:05] think about Vladimir Putin, his invasion
[16:09] of Ukraine, pivotal error. Russia is
[16:12] just uh has burned through its cold war
[16:16] arsenal. Putin would have been doing
[16:18] much better when he did the easy walking
[16:21] with his little green men into Crimea
[16:23] and Donbass of just sitting with that
[16:26] and slowly destabilizing Ukraine over a
[16:29] number of years. Right? Instead, he has
[16:32] massively contributed to Ukrainian
[16:35] national identity. National identities
[16:37] often come out of wars. In fact, Britain
[16:40] massively contributed to the development
[16:42] of the US national identity during the
[16:45] American Revolution because it was all
[16:47] these separate colonies that by the time
[16:49] that revolution was over had a much more
[16:51] cohesive sense of nation and um all
[16:54] these national institutions that grow up
[16:57] as a result of it. You see Ukraine's
[16:59] doing that as as well. So, a pivotal
[17:00] error. And then for us on
[17:03] the Iran war, we've lost our alliance
[17:06] system. Sure, someone else can reassess
[17:08] and we'll try to restore stuff, but we
[17:11] will never be the trusted partner ever
[17:13] again. It's done.
[17:15] >> You said the postw World War II world is
[17:17] collapsing
[17:19] and we are now going into a second cold
[17:21] war that could end in nuclear war.
[17:25] What is What is it that's collapsing,
[17:27] Sarah? Well, isn't it the way um systems
[17:30] work is by norms that we follow norms.
[17:32] And the way I think about it is like
[17:34] traffic. So, most of us whatever side of
[17:37] the road you're supposed to drive on in
[17:39] whatever country you're in, you do that
[17:41] and then there's stop lights and you do
[17:42] that and I get it that people speed and
[17:44] stuff, but mostly people are following
[17:47] the the rules of the road and there
[17:49] aren't nearly enough. If everyone
[17:51] decided to just do whatever on a given
[17:52] day, there aren't enough policemen ever
[17:54] to enforce that. It would just be
[17:55] mayhem, right? So the rules-based order
[17:58] was always based on norms of following
[18:02] them and the US legal order was based on
[18:05] norms of everyone more or less following
[18:07] them.
[18:07] >> Give me an example of some of those
[18:09] norms.
[18:09] >> Um when you lose an election to go um I
[18:12] uh congratulate the other side and uh I
[18:15] will do better next time instead of oh
[18:17] no they cheated.
[18:19] Now the United States is pulling out of
[18:22] this order. The existential threat that
[18:25] this is posing has led to the most rapid
[18:27] institution building uh in Europe. It's
[18:30] incredibly fast
[18:31] >> institution building.
[18:33] >> Yeah. You got uh the Baltic 8 that are
[18:37] so you got um Nordic countries, right?
[18:40] You got Finland, Sweden, Norway, and
[18:42] then Denmark. That makes four. And uh
[18:45] the the Scandinavian countries and then
[18:46] you got the Baltic, Estonia, Latia, and
[18:49] Lithuania. And then Iceland's part of
[18:52] this as well. And so they've been
[18:54] organizing all sorts of security things
[18:56] together. There's remilitarization going
[18:59] on. Uh there's also work on space ports
[19:02] all over the place. Britain is since the
[19:04] 60s has space ports. So has Norway,
[19:07] Sweden. Britain's going to build a new
[19:09] one up in the Shetland Islands. And it's
[19:11] because you all are going to be
[19:12] launching your own satellite system. And
[19:14] I think also you all are sick of our
[19:17] credit card payment systems. You're
[19:19] going to do that locally. There's an app
[19:22] that's been put out. Apparently, if in
[19:24] Europe you want to buy stuff, your app
[19:26] will tell you immediately whether a
[19:27] product is American or not. So, you
[19:29] don't have to buy that product. It's
[19:30] called the B-word boycott, which is
[19:32] happening to America right now as a
[19:35] result of doing all of this. And you've
[19:37] seen Prime Minister Carney of Canada
[19:40] traveling everywhere organizing the
[19:42] middle powers. That'll be the new world
[19:45] order. It's unfolding.
[19:47] And the United States is
[19:50] uh it's it's gone rogue as America. It's
[19:55] uh we're on the right side of two world
[19:57] wars. Made an incredibly positive
[19:59] contribution in many many ways. And what
[20:01] we're doing now is so negative and it's
[20:03] profoundly negative for the futures of
[20:06] our children.
[20:07] >> Would you say to the people that say
[20:10] Sarah, we should stay out of these wars.
[20:12] We should stay out of the Ukraine
[20:13] situation. By all means, do not send
[20:16] combat troops all over the place, which
[20:19] is what we were doing in the Middle
[20:20] East. You position people like Ukraine
[20:23] to succeed. You don't have to send any
[20:25] troops there, but uh give them what they
[20:29] need to solve this. That is the cheap
[20:32] thing to do. The uh unche
[20:35] is blow our alliance system. So now
[20:37] people are boycotting us. There are all
[20:39] kinds of industries in the United States
[20:41] that are being hurt by this from uh what
[20:44] is it? Kentucky bourbon makers have to
[20:46] shut down. Kid you not cuz the Canadians
[20:49] won't buy our booze. You think about it.
[20:52] If you have a business, let's say
[20:54] Canada's only 5 or 10% of your business.
[20:56] Well, if they boycott you, that might be
[20:57] your profit margin,
[21:00] right? Canada's arranging to uh sell its
[21:03] energy to Europe and other places and
[21:07] trying to derisk from us and it's
[21:09] entirely our fault. We threaten them.
[21:12] >> People say that, you know, we don't want
[21:13] to we don't want to have to pay for
[21:14] someone else's war. Sarah, it's going to
[21:17] we don't know how long it's going to
[21:18] last. It's going to cost so much money.
[21:19] What do you say to those people?
[21:20] >> It goes back to limited and unlimited
[21:22] objectives. And unlimited objective is
[21:26] regime change and the most unlimited
[21:28] variant is genocide as well. So Hitler
[21:30] had both, right? And Putin has very
[21:33] unlimited variant because he wants to
[21:35] not only take over Ukraine, but he also
[21:37] wants to shoot up a good part of the
[21:40] government down to small children. That
[21:42] was he was trying to execute the
[21:43] Zilinski family. What what person does
[21:46] that sort of stuff? In addition, he
[21:48] wants to uh eliminate the purveyors of
[21:50] Ukrainian culture. You kill them. And
[21:53] that's called genocide. So you can have
[21:56] a whole continuum, right? You can have
[21:57] the most li unlimited thing of genocide
[22:00] plus regime change and you come a little
[22:02] bit over and it's just regime change and
[22:04] then the limited stuff means I only want
[22:06] half your country too all the way down
[22:09] to I don't know I want you to be polite
[22:10] to me at football games whatever it is.
[22:12] So this is where Russia comes in I
[22:16] believe and I could be wrong and the key
[22:19] on being right or wrong is you should
[22:20] constantly reassess.
[22:22] Don't worry about being wrong. Uh what
[22:24] you do when you realize you got it wrong
[22:26] is say I got new information and here's
[22:28] why I think differently but I believe
[22:29] that Russia has unlimited objectives
[22:32] that Putin wants to restore the old
[22:35] Soviet empire. There are many problems
[22:38] with that. One of them is you think
[22:41] about Russia.
[22:43] Russia's been the backwater of Europe
[22:46] forever under the Zars. Can you think of
[22:49] one Russian product that you have ever
[22:50] wanted to buy?
[22:52] >> No comment. Okay. And let me give you a
[22:55] little hint. Smeirnoffs is a British
[22:58] company, right? They don't even produce
[23:00] the vodka. So, it's these unre uh these
[23:04] manufactured goods. No, it's just a
[23:07] basic primary goods. So, it has a
[23:09] failing economic model. Then during the
[23:11] cold war, it's exporting communism
[23:14] everywhere, setting back uh living
[23:17] standards everywhere. When you do that,
[23:20] it involves a lot of deaths because
[23:22] there are children who aren't getting
[23:24] vaccines and all kinds of things that
[23:25] are not happening when you're doing
[23:27] that. So that's what Russia's done. And
[23:29] now Putin thinks uh based on his sheer
[23:31] legacy of incompetence that now he has
[23:33] the right to rule everyone else. What's
[23:35] really going on? He's a continentalist
[23:38] and so he wants to steal everyone else's
[23:40] stuff. Remember in the beginning of the
[23:41] Ukraine war, people were stealing
[23:43] washing machines. That would be a rather
[23:45] heavy item to steal. I mean, who would
[23:48] do that? someone without washing
[23:50] machines,
[23:52] right? And uh the Ukrainians don't want
[23:55] to live that way.
[23:56] >> Did he underestimate them?
[23:58] >> Yeah, of course. That's typical. Uh
[24:00] there's probably Russian type A hubris.
[24:02] The Russian soul superior to all others
[24:05] cuz they can't figure out what they're
[24:06] superior on. So, they're going to come
[24:07] up with something that's abstract like
[24:09] their soul. Well, prove it. Zalinsky
[24:11] told me that when the Russian soldiers
[24:13] rolled in, he found that they had
[24:16] brought food for 3 to 10 days. So, they
[24:19] thought the war would be over in three
[24:20] or 10 days. And also that they brought
[24:22] uniforms to celebrate to do a victory
[24:24] parade because they thought the war was
[24:25] going to be that easy.
[24:26] >> And what they were met with is
[24:28] Ukrainians civilians throwing Molotov
[24:30] cocktails at their tanks.
[24:31] >> Yeah.
[24:33] >> You look as if you have another
[24:34] question.
[24:34] >> It's just it's interesting because Yeah.
[24:36] It's again, we were just talking about
[24:37] underestimating
[24:39] Iran, but There is a hubris as well
[24:41] that's taken place with
[24:42] >> the Russians. They've underestimated
[24:45] >> the culture of the people. Death ground.
[24:47] >> Yeah. If you have an unlimited
[24:49] objective, what you're doing is if I
[24:54] have an unlimited objective against you,
[24:56] I'm putting you on death ground. What
[24:58] does that mean? It means if you don't
[25:00] fight, I'm going to just come kill you.
[25:03] And so your only alternative is to fight
[25:07] cuz they're going to just kill you. So
[25:10] if you have these unlimited objectives,
[25:13] expect one hell of a fight and it can
[25:16] transform the most dysfunctional country
[25:19] into a lethal adversary as Hitler
[25:21] discovered with uh the Soviet Union back
[25:25] in the day. Stalin had shot a lot of his
[25:27] officer corps. He created a famine in
[25:29] Ukraine, which is a bread basket, which
[25:32] is exactly what Putin is has done to
[25:34] Ukraine now. And what the United States
[25:36] is undoubtedly doing to Iran. My
[25:39] understanding is the uh Ayatollah who's
[25:43] gone was against having nukes. No one
[25:45] says who comes after him is against
[25:46] having nukes. If they're on death ground
[25:50] as long as Donald Trump and BB Netanyahu
[25:53] are in power, what do you think they're
[25:54] going to do?
[25:56] They're going to cause trouble until
[25:58] those two people are out of power.
[26:01] Right? And so people who want to keep
[26:02] Netanyahu and Trump in power longer just
[26:05] understand it's going to make Iran go on
[26:08] uh longer and then I'm terrified that uh
[26:12] Trump will do something like drop a
[26:14] tactical nuke somewhere and then things
[26:16] are really over. Uh the United States
[26:18] will be forever this despicable country.
[26:22] The only country in the world that's
[26:24] ever dropped nukes on anyone. Twice on
[26:26] Japan and then we're going to do a third
[26:28] on Iran.
[26:30] Do you think that's plausible? That
[26:31] >> I have no idea. If if you had told me 10
[26:34] years ago that where we're at is was
[26:37] even remotely plausible, I would say,
[26:38] "You're insane. What have you been
[26:40] smoking lately?" The United States was
[26:43] going to toss our alliances, tell Canada
[26:45] you're our 51st state, and then tell
[26:47] Green Ms, we're going to take Greenland
[26:49] from you and therefore
[26:52] behave yourselves. It I would have
[26:55] thought that just ludicrous. Who would
[26:56] do that?
[26:57] What do you say to people who are
[26:59] experiencing their gas prices go up at
[27:01] the pump? They're seeing costs rise
[27:03] because of this war and because of the
[27:04] energy shock that's taken place because
[27:06] of it. And they want they want it to
[27:08] end. So they're saying, "Listen,
[27:09] >> vote.
[27:10] >> Vote." Onethird of Americans voted for
[27:13] where we're at now. Onethird voted for
[27:17] anything but this. And then one-third
[27:19] couldn't get off their couch. Get off
[27:22] your couch and vote because it matters
[27:24] for your children. that in the United
[27:27] States, Americans need to start talking
[27:29] to each other. This only my party can
[27:32] win. Crazy. A two-party state is
[27:34] absolutely necessary cuz how do you see
[27:37] blind spots? Also, you will watch Trump.
[27:40] You want your gas tax prices to go down.
[27:42] He's not going to reassess on this war.
[27:43] He's just going to keep on going. The
[27:46] way you reassess in democracies since
[27:48] people are reluctant to say, "Gee, I got
[27:50] it wrong." And we all get it wrong, is
[27:53] you elect the other party. But if I just
[27:56] think about what's going on here in
[27:57] Europe, because I'm thinking about a
[27:58] particular friend who's been doing some
[27:59] tweets recently,
[28:00] >> um, and she's been tweeting that because
[28:03] the costs in the UK seem to be rising,
[28:06] petrol, and other things, we should just
[28:09] let, this is what she said. She said we
[28:11] should just let Russia take the Ukraine
[28:13] and then that'll mean that energy will
[28:16] be stabilized.
[28:17] >> I get it where she's coming from. I get
[28:20] it. But it's uh one of the war staples
[28:25] in war colleges is the enemy gets a
[28:27] vote. Meaning that the Russians are
[28:30] going to come for you whether you like
[28:32] it or not.
[28:33] >> How do we know that?
[28:34] >> You don't know, right? You don't know.
[28:37] But I can look at Russian history.
[28:38] They're continentalists. They go
[28:40] forward, forward, forward. And then I
[28:42] think you've got some kind of map that
[28:44] shows what Transnistria and all those
[28:46] places.
[28:47] >> Oh, this one.
[28:48] >> Yeah. All right. cell if I can do that
[28:51] this way. So these are the places that
[28:54] Putin has taken. Well, this one's
[28:56] earlier and uh this one comes to the end
[28:59] of the cold war. This is his buddy.
[29:01] >> So he's basically taken Barus, but
[29:03] >> uh yeah politically. Well, he Yeah,
[29:05] that's right. And so and he's taken all
[29:07] this stuff from Ukraine, but these
[29:09] places he took uh what is he Putin comes
[29:11] to power in the second Chetchin war and
[29:14] Russians like that. Uh that's how he
[29:17] rises. And then in 2008, he goes after
[29:20] Georgia and helps these two places
[29:22] separate. But if you look at it, if you
[29:24] could draw a circle here, it's a
[29:27] continental I don't know if you ever
[29:28] watched the Jetsons, the uh cartoon
[29:31] where you got a spaceship. It's round.
[29:33] Continentalist is looking at their
[29:34] dashboard. It's but it's 360° around
[29:37] their little spaceship on all those
[29:39] borders and you want to extend outwards.
[29:41] So this is the the plan A. And then
[29:45] after you get plan A, they keep on
[29:47] going. It's been this way for a long
[29:50] time. And for your friend, it'd be like,
[29:53] uh, what evidence do you have? Uh, show
[29:57] it to me that they're going to stop.
[29:59] Show me that. What in their in their
[30:01] history gives you that? I understand
[30:02] that you wish it to end. This is another
[30:05] tragedy. So we had
[30:08] the cold war that ended on western terms
[30:12] with Bush senior and helmet cole did a
[30:14] masterful job at war termination. Truly
[30:17] masterful on on western terms. And then
[30:20] we had the magical, this is when you
[30:21] were growing up, the magical intercol
[30:23] war period where China and Russia turn
[30:26] inward and the United States is more or
[30:28] less following the rules so that you
[30:31] don't have opposing sides funding
[30:33] opposing sides of insurgencies all over
[30:35] the world and war is just torch
[30:39] wealth, right? Think about if Putin
[30:41] keeps any part of Ukraine, it's a
[30:44] glowing mess, right? It's been leveled.
[30:46] You're just destroying things. But
[30:48] they're going to continue to fight as
[30:49] well, aren't they? This is what Zalinsky
[30:51] told me. He said,
[30:51] >> "They're going to go forever." Yeah.
[30:52] What did he said? He's the real person.
[30:54] >> He said something to me which I found to
[30:57] be quite illuminating and I don't think
[30:58] people consider. He said to me he had
[31:01] gone and found, just one example, a
[31:03] trench, what the Russian soldiers had
[31:06] left where there was 500 tortured bodies
[31:08] in it. These bodies were tied up.
[31:10] >> Oh god.
[31:10] >> Um and they were of all ages. And he
[31:12] said it's he kind of implied that it's
[31:15] very naive to think that the families of
[31:17] those people in those ditches are just
[31:19] going to allow there to be a sudden stop
[31:22] to this and that they're not going to
[31:24] continue to want revenge. And Zillinsky
[31:27] said to me, he said after seeing that
[31:29] and he said it, he said, "I know I
[31:30] probably shouldn't say this, but he said
[31:32] that he wants revenge." He says, "If you
[31:34] see what I saw, you would want revenge,
[31:36] too." The Russians are it's unspeakable
[31:39] what they've done. In most of my life,
[31:42] Germans wore the crown of infamy for
[31:45] what had happened in World War less so
[31:48] World War I, but it's World War II where
[31:50] they just it's really it takes heinous
[31:53] to a new level. Well, Vlad the Bad, he
[31:56] is now owns that crown for Russians
[31:58] going in because Germans have reformed
[32:01] their educational system and there's no
[32:04] German now who has any responsibility
[32:06] for what happened back then. But there
[32:08] are lots of Russians who have
[32:10] responsibility for going on right now.
[32:12] And oh, another piece of Russians. They
[32:14] go, "Oh, Soviet Union has nothing to do
[32:15] with us. That's, you know, we're
[32:17] Russians. That was the Soviet Union."
[32:18] Excuse me. Russia is what ran the Soviet
[32:21] Union. It's yours. you own it. You think
[32:24] about like the the way French f French
[32:26] use the word France. It includes all
[32:28] five republics. It includes all the
[32:30] monarchies. It includes Napoleon and
[32:32] stuff. We all know it's France. It's
[32:34] just the Russians who were trying to
[32:35] say, "Oh, it's the Soviet Union. We had
[32:37] nothing to do with that." No, you had
[32:38] everything to do with that. You're
[32:39] unrepentant. So for your friend, if you
[32:43] look at the long arc of Russian history,
[32:45] it's terrible. It used to be under the
[32:47] Romanov dynasty at least they aspired to
[32:52] have connections with Western Europe.
[32:55] Although I think Nicholas II said,
[32:56] "Well, you know, we're 200 years behind,
[32:58] so we're going to do do it our way."
[33:00] Well, once you get the communists, they
[33:02] want to overthrow the entire capitalist
[33:05] world order. And Putin hasn't changed.
[33:08] The Continentalists are profoundly
[33:10] dangerous. What they want to do is
[33:12] divide the world into spheres of
[33:14] influence
[33:15] like the old empires of Eurasia. And so
[33:18] they're going to be fighting on the
[33:19] edges of these spheres of influence
[33:21] about who gets what.
[33:22] >> Who are the continentalists? Russia,
[33:24] China.
[33:24] >> Yep. Russia, China. Uh Donald Trump.
[33:27] He's claiming Canadian territory. He's
[33:29] claiming uh Greenland. He's uh kidnapped
[33:32] a head of state. Uh I get it. The guy's
[33:34] reprehensible. I'm no fan of Maduro. I
[33:36] mean, look at the war. We've discussed
[33:39] all the problems from the war in Iran.
[33:40] You're talking about your friend in
[33:42] Britain who's being wrecked by the
[33:44] petrol prices. Okay. Whose fault is
[33:46] that?
[33:48] >> Trump's.
[33:49] >> Yeah, it is.
[33:50] >> Trump would say it was Biden's fault.
[33:52] >> Oh, everything's Biden's fault.
[33:53] >> He, you know, he often his favorite line
[33:55] is to say, "This war never would have
[33:56] happened if I was in power." That's what
[33:59] he says all the time.
[34:00] >> Yeah, except he started this one. Uh so
[34:03] it what's fascinating in having studied
[34:06] foreign policy forever. It doesn't make
[34:07] me write about anything but it's really
[34:09] rare or like domestic policy as well
[34:12] that you do a policy whatever it is put
[34:14] a new law in effect and then there are
[34:18] consequences of it but the consequences
[34:20] usually roll out out over years. So it's
[34:23] hard to say did this law exactly cause
[34:25] this outcome. It's hard to say. Not in
[34:28] this war.
[34:29] >> Which one?
[34:29] >> Uh the Iran war. It's just obvious.
[34:32] Every time you load up at the pump, you
[34:34] have a weekly reminder that Donald
[34:36] Trump's war has done a number on you.
[34:39] It's not Biden.
[34:41] >> He would say, "We couldn't let Iran get
[34:42] nuclear weapons."
[34:43] >> It's much more likely now that they will
[34:45] get nuclear weapons doing what he's
[34:47] incentivized them to get nuclear
[34:48] weapons. Here's my my thing about Donald
[34:50] Trump. Is he known for for um providing
[34:53] accurate information?
[34:56] You know the answer to that question as
[34:58] do all of your viewers. And here's the
[35:01] problem with normalizing lies, which is
[35:04] what's going on in the United States. A,
[35:06] no one likes being lied to, right? If
[35:08] you're an insider traitor, maybe you
[35:11] like it if you you get your little truth
[35:13] and then you everyone else is being lied
[35:14] to. All right. The Soviet Union was a
[35:17] society that collapsed in large part
[35:20] because it was built on lies. Here's how
[35:22] it worked. If you since it's all run by
[35:24] a plan, this communist plan, so you're
[35:26] running your little, let's say they even
[35:28] had podcasts, and you decide however
[35:31] many cameras you need a new year and how
[35:33] many you got on stock or whatever you
[35:35] think your staff is, you're going to
[35:37] exaggerate what you think you need
[35:38] because you aren't sure the plan's going
[35:40] to give it to you and you're going to
[35:42] understate what you have again because
[35:44] you're not sure you're going to get
[35:45] things. So, everyone's doing that across
[35:47] an economy. They're aggregating all that
[35:49] data. It's garbage. The further up the
[35:51] food chain you go, the more ludicrous
[35:53] the data is. But there in central
[35:55] Moscow, they're coming up with a plan
[35:58] that's going to allocate things. They
[35:59] are grossly misallocating capital,
[36:02] labor, and they don't notice that it's a
[36:05] disaster until it's metastasized
[36:08] and it shatters the place. Another thing
[36:12] to give you, an economy doubles at
[36:16] different growth rates according to the
[36:17] following equation. the natural log of
[36:20] two over whatever that growth rate is.
[36:22] If your economy grows at 1% perom it'll
[36:27] double in 69 70 years something like
[36:29] that. If you uh grow at 3% so it's 2%
[36:33] differential you'll double in 23 years.
[36:36] So if you do dumbasserie like tariff
[36:39] yourself or you get into a war that's
[36:42] going to send prices up and just mess
[36:45] things uh up or if you're a little
[36:48] smarter and you sanction the other guy
[36:49] so only the other guy is experiencing
[36:52] this and you knock off 2% growth instead
[36:56] of waiting 23 years to double you're
[36:57] going to wait 71. That's a long wait. So
[37:01] these are the things that people aren't
[37:02] considering
[37:04] of the cumulative effects of making the
[37:07] kind of errors that we're making. Also
[37:10] the advantages of sanctions over wars.
[37:13] Sanctions don't solve problems but
[37:15] you're shrinking the opposing piggy bank
[37:17] and if you cooperate with allies you're
[37:20] growing yourself. So it's a form of
[37:22] chemotherapy. You don't eliminate the
[37:23] tumor but you try to shrink it back.
[37:26] >> You have a PhD in Russian. Is it
[37:29] history? Yeah. So what does Russian
[37:31] history tell us is and I guess
[37:34] geopolitical history generally is likely
[37:36] to happen next as it relates to the
[37:38] Russian Ukraine situation and is it
[37:40] dependent on what other allies do or do
[37:43] you think there's already a pivotal
[37:45] error that's been made by Putin?
[37:47] >> Oh it's it's already done. He's just
[37:48] going to go forward.
[37:50] >> He's just going to go forward.
[37:51] >> He's just going to escalate and keep
[37:52] going forward. Yep.
[37:53] >> Because he can't he can't go back. He
[37:55] doesn't strike. I mean
[37:57] >> this is the problem with dictatorships.
[37:58] What's wonderful about elections? So,
[38:00] they throw you out of office, but no one
[38:02] kills you. No one takes your bank
[38:05] accounts away. It really takes a lot of
[38:07] the uh uh the white knuckle event out of
[38:11] it. And in Russia, Andre Stalin, when
[38:14] he's busy shooting everybody, he dies
[38:17] and uh eventually you get Krushchoff as
[38:20] his successor. that successor generation
[38:23] decided they wanted to uh make it so you
[38:26] didn't get killed when you left office
[38:28] that they send you to your little
[38:30] dachcha or that's your summer house in
[38:32] Russia. Uh Putin's problem is this is
[38:35] the problem with dictators for many of
[38:37] them there's no offramp where they're
[38:38] alive
[38:40] right what happens to Putin when he uh
[38:43] he gets swapped out of power if he just
[38:44] dies naturally okay then that happens to
[38:47] all of us but he's arranged it so there
[38:49] is no retirement plan except something
[38:51] really ugly
[38:52] >> why how
[38:53] >> a dictator well how would you ever
[38:55] replace Putin in Russia
[38:57] >> couldn't he just step down and go off to
[38:58] his mansion and chill out
[39:00] >> probably not because uh there will
[39:03] people who will come kill him on his
[39:05] immediate entourage. He's the whole
[39:07] protection racket that's running stuff.
[39:10] >> Is it possible for him to be overthrown
[39:11] by the Russian people?
[39:13] >> Yeah,
[39:13] >> it is possible because it just seems
[39:15] like he's got such a tight grip on
[39:16] >> Oh, well, that's the thing about
[39:18] dictatorships is they seem eternal until
[39:20] the day they shatter and then it's
[39:22] impossible to predict.
[39:24] >> How do they shatter?
[39:25] >> Oh, the Romanov dynasty. Nicholas II
[39:29] like Vlad the Bad uh decided to get into
[39:32] a recreational war they didn't have to
[39:34] which is the RussoJapanese war of 1904
[39:36] 1905 and why Russia this is the whole
[39:39] thing about Russia why does Russia need
[39:40] more territory it is the largest country
[39:42] on the planet right they have tons of
[39:45] resources their problem is they have no
[39:46] economic model to develop it because
[39:49] they refuse to go by the norms of having
[39:51] rules so people can start businesses
[39:53] like a young person like you who can
[39:56] start a
[39:57] And then when you start doing well, you
[39:59] can actually keep your money. That's not
[40:00] what happens in Russia. You'll get
[40:01] shaken down. So Nicholas second does
[40:04] that war, he loses it. But then there's
[40:06] another concept, opportunity cost. So if
[40:09] you spend all of your money fighting
[40:12] that war, what are you not doing? You're
[40:14] not building a railway system here in
[40:17] the western part of Russia.
[40:21] So come World War I, Nicholas can't
[40:24] deploy his troops very well. He's got no
[40:27] way in for his allies to supply him
[40:30] because Russia's this is Russia's stuff.
[40:33] Uh main ports for getting things by sea
[40:36] are here, the Baltic or here, the Black
[40:38] Sea. Well, those things shut down in
[40:39] wartime, right? That nothing goes
[40:41] through them. So, if Nicholas hadn't
[40:43] done his dumbassery here and built
[40:46] railways, he might have had a different
[40:47] outcome. And why does he get overthrown?
[40:50] Because there are food riots in St.
[40:51] Petersburg. That was the capital in
[40:53] those days. Okay, better railways. you
[40:55] would have delivered the bread better.
[40:56] Also, you might have gotten food aid
[40:58] from other places. Uh these opportunity
[41:01] costs are huge. Now, Vlad the Bad has
[41:03] done his magic here. Who's supporting
[41:06] them? Well, China is providing what's
[41:09] vital for him right now.
[41:10] >> Why are they supporting Vladimir Putin?
[41:12] Why?
[41:13] >> Why not? Oh, God.
[41:14] >> Why don't they just stay out of it?
[41:16] >> From their point of view, they want the
[41:17] United States just out of everyone's
[41:19] business. And they also don't
[41:22] particularly like Russia either. So if
[41:24] Russia's going to go weaken itself here,
[41:28] uh, China will benefit from this.
[41:31] Chinese needs their resources. My
[41:33] graduate uh dissertation was a history
[41:34] of the Russo-Chinese border and Russia
[41:37] took territory from the Chinese sphere
[41:40] of influence greater than all of US east
[41:44] of Mississippi. It's all of this stuff
[41:48] that was uh part of the Chinese sphere
[41:51] of influence. You want to tell me the
[41:52] Chinese don't remember that?
[41:54] >> So, China are supplying Russia with
[41:57] resources they need.
[41:58] >> Yeah. To make missiles and things.
[42:00] >> They're charging them for that. Of
[42:01] course,
[42:01] >> they're making money from it, but
[42:02] they're also weakening Russia. Russia.
[42:04] >> Yeah. Because they're Russia is has been
[42:06] sanctioned on its energy and other
[42:08] things. So, China is getting all these
[42:10] things at much reduced prices and
[42:12] they're driving a hard bargain. And the
[42:14] Russians in the past had all these
[42:16] nuclear weapons and other things to
[42:18] dissuade the Chinese from playing Mr.
[42:20] Tough Guy. Except Vladimir Putin has
[42:24] squandered all of that. He can't even
[42:25] deal with Ukraine, let alone this. So,
[42:29] they've done massive pivotal error.
[42:31] They're in real trouble. And then
[42:33] they're not even have they're not having
[42:34] kids. And so, the the long-term effects
[42:37] are getting better and worse and worse
[42:39] from them.
[42:39] >> Russia have the missiles just to flatten
[42:41] Ukraine, don't they? I don't know the
[42:43] details. Uh but
[42:45] >> they have like nuclear weapons.
[42:46] >> Yeah, they do. They do. Um this is
[42:48] beyond my expertise. And um in order to
[42:52] have them, you have to maintain them.
[42:54] And the Russians are consumate liars.
[42:56] Who knows? Who knows? My understanding
[43:00] uh is that India and China have told
[43:02] Russia that would be a massive no no if
[43:04] they do that. But when people get
[43:07] cornered uh then others have no
[43:10] influence over them. and when they're
[43:12] totally cornered. So, I don't know the
[43:14] answer.
[43:15] >> So, it sounds like from speaking to
[43:16] Zalinski, he will not yield an inch of
[43:20] Ukraine
[43:21] >> to Putin.
[43:22] >> And it sounds like Putin has to walk
[43:25] away looking like he got a victory of
[43:27] sorts for his people and for his power
[43:29] and really for the message, you know, to
[43:30] some of these other
[43:32] >> people that he uh sits on a border with
[43:33] and to NATO. I guess
[43:35] >> the two things can't be true in my view.
[43:39] No, that's the problem with uh
[43:41] unleashing unlimited wars. Uh World War
[43:44] II,
[43:46] uh yes, the allies won, but obs at
[43:50] obscene cost, right? Tens of millions of
[43:54] Russians died. Millions of others died.
[43:58] What is it supposed to be? 55 million
[44:00] people died in that thing. You want to
[44:01] do that over again? Really, these
[44:03] unlimited wars are ugly. It is not the
[44:07] way to handle things. It is far better
[44:10] to deploy your diplomats and lawyers to
[44:12] international institutions. Sure, the
[44:15] deal isn't perfect for what you wish you
[44:17] had gotten, but the wealth will compound
[44:20] if you have uh people your age to go
[44:22] start their businesses, have laws that
[44:25] allow them to do it instead of trying to
[44:27] poach everyone's stuff. That is the way
[44:30] to to do things. So yeah, of course
[44:33] Ukraine won't give up and we should
[44:35] support Ukraine
[44:37] because they're doing the heavy lifting
[44:38] for all of us. That's the answer to your
[44:41] friend. You want to be fighting on the
[44:42] front lines?
[44:44] No. So help them.
[44:48] Now morals matter in this world. They
[44:51] matter. Honesty matters.
[44:54] Civility matters.
[44:57] All these things matter. Oh, and there's
[44:59] another uh piece I think matters. What
[45:01] do governments do? Primary things.
[45:04] Protect your national security. That's
[45:06] number one. And protect your prosperity.
[45:09] Try to uh increase your prosperity.
[45:11] Those are two. So for your friend, what
[45:14] is going to protect British national
[45:17] security? And that will involve Europe
[45:20] because if Britain's alone, it's not
[45:21] going to do well without Western Europe
[45:23] being uh healthy as well. has this
[45:27] somewhat fallen at an unfortunate time
[45:28] because Europe is not doing the best
[45:30] economically at the moment and there are
[45:33] lots of sort of internal conflicts
[45:35] taking place. I mean, I was I was in
[45:36] France yesterday and I left my hotel,
[45:39] the streets are on fire.
[45:40] >> At night time, there's balaclava people
[45:42] running into all the shops and smashing
[45:44] them to pieces. And um you know, then I
[45:47] think about the UK, you know, maybe not
[45:48] in a worse position, but I actually I
[45:50] mean, I read uh just before I I came out
[45:52] here to speak to you, I read a headline
[45:54] from the Sunday Times that reads, this
[45:58] is in today's newspaper, Britain is
[46:01] going broke. It's just a matter of when.
[46:03] With three trillion debt and interest of
[46:06] 110 billion a year, the new chancellor
[46:09] has little room to maneuver from Jessica
[46:11] Cook. This is like the sentiment that
[46:13] that is quite unprevent at the moment in
[46:15] Europe. So when you you think about
[46:18] spending money on another nation, uh you
[46:21] know, this is probably why there's a lot
[46:23] of people that are against it.
[46:24] >> Europe feels weak.
[46:26] >> Yeah. And here's the story for your
[46:29] generation because I'm going to age out
[46:32] of this mess, but you're going to have
[46:34] to live with it. Think about the
[46:36] generation that's the end of World War
[46:37] II. Europe's leveled.
[46:41] Everyone's indebted right after that
[46:44] war.
[46:45] And that generation within 10 years had
[46:49] set up the institutional architecture
[46:51] that held the peace in Europe for the
[46:54] next three generations. That is quite an
[46:56] achievement. And what's going on now is
[46:59] history's moving really fast. I mean,
[47:02] it's just it's like the log jam's busted
[47:04] and we don't know which way it's going
[47:06] to go. And it's tremendously
[47:07] frightening. But on the other hand, it
[47:10] is a tremendous opportunity
[47:13] to before the concrete sets again for
[47:17] people to get moving. What is it? When
[47:19] the going gets tough, the tough get
[47:20] going. get going
[47:22] >> and do well
[47:23] >> and work on the next set of institutions
[47:26] that will help growth rates in Europe
[47:28] that have uh not been great that need to
[47:31] be better. Probably part of that has to
[47:33] do with streamlining regulations and
[47:35] then that's beyond my capabilities of of
[47:38] understanding. Americans think all their
[47:40] problems are about immigrants coming
[47:42] across the border, right? And I'm all
[47:45] for having legal immigration. Why would
[47:47] you have, you know, people should have
[47:49] to follow rules, etc. You don't have to
[47:51] be cruel at how you expel them. You can
[47:54] do that humanely. Um, being gratuitously
[47:57] mean, I don't see it. But, um, so people
[48:00] um, as in Europe identified that there's
[48:03] this problem that for the young, it's
[48:04] just hard to make it. What's going on
[48:06] here? And this feeling there are no
[48:08] opportunities and it's just hopeless.
[48:10] Okay, that's probably a correct
[48:12] identification of problem. But in the
[48:14] United States, I suspect the answer is
[48:16] not immigrants. It's probably our tax
[48:19] code. So tax code is what sends money
[48:24] one way or the other. It's what's going
[48:27] to make money available for spending
[48:29] things one way or the other. So in the
[48:31] United States, you've got a handful of
[48:34] people who've become uh billionaires
[48:36] really literally over the last 15 years.
[48:39] Can't do that without the tax code. And
[48:42] then there's I know another piece in the
[48:43] United States you know about monopolies,
[48:45] right? You own all of a particular
[48:47] industry and then you can set prices
[48:49] what you sell stuff in at. But then
[48:51] there's monopsin which means you hire
[48:54] such a large percentage of the workforce
[48:56] or in what particular area you're at.
[48:59] You dictate wages.
[49:01] Well, we got problems with wages in the
[49:04] United States that uh they've been
[49:07] driven downwards.
[49:09] Uh and people are working uh 40hour
[49:12] weeks and more than that and they can't
[49:13] make ends meet. What's going on here?
[49:16] They're being underpaid and then the
[49:18] money is just being funneled into a
[49:20] handful of families coffers. I think in
[49:23] the United States there apparently uh a
[49:25] thousand families that are worth a
[49:27] billion or better. It's not actually
[49:29] very many people
[49:30] >> because the world is different now and
[49:31] there's a sort of digital assets well at
[49:33] least assets that you can move
[49:35] digitally. Um is it harder to to use the
[49:38] tax code as a tool for uh fixing
[49:41] inequality?
[49:42] >> I mean you'd have to talk to us tax
[49:44] specialists but the US tax code uh
[49:47] >> that allows people to become hugely
[49:49] wealthy is is an error. Well, this is
[49:52] where there's a missing podcast in the
[49:54] United States, which would be someone
[49:57] actually reading the tax code and
[49:58] breaking it, literally breaking it down
[50:00] into pieces and then talking uh the
[50:03] human connection of it all. And there's
[50:06] a lot of there there, but it hasn't been
[50:08] I guess it would be too boring to read
[50:10] it. I think actually uh there's a lot in
[50:12] there.
[50:14] >> I um have a stat here that genuinely
[50:17] shocked me. It says that sales teams
[50:19] spend about 50% of their time on admin
[50:21] and manual CRM updates rather than
[50:24] selling. That is deadly for their bottom
[50:26] line. And that is part of the reason why
[50:28] a decade ago at my previous company I
[50:30] switched to using Piperive who are our
[50:32] sponsor. If you've never used Pipe
[50:33] Drive, it is an intelligent AI powered
[50:35] sales CRM. And they just launched new
[50:37] meeting intelligence features like an AI
[50:40] notetaker built right into the CRM. Pipe
[50:42] Drive now automates more of the admin
[50:44] that stops you from doing the work that
[50:45] you love to do best. before your
[50:47] meeting. It pulls deal history, email
[50:49] records, and previous conversations into
[50:50] a single brief so you're prepared. And
[50:52] it joins your meetings with you. It's in
[50:54] there to take notes so you don't need
[50:55] to, and it turns those notes that it
[50:57] takes into accurate autodraft CRM
[51:00] updates. 100,000 companies are already
[51:03] running their sales on it. You can sign
[51:04] up at piperive.com/ceo
[51:07] where you'll get an exclusive 30-day
[51:10] free trial instead of the usual 14 days.
[51:13] Absolutely no credit card needed. Just
[51:14] head to pipedive.com/ce
[51:16] to get started. If you're in sales and
[51:18] you run a sales team, I don't think
[51:19] you'll regret it. There's this
[51:22] philosophical principle called Okam's
[51:24] razor. Simply put, the simplest solution
[51:26] is often the best one. And there's been
[51:28] plenty of times in my life where that's
[51:30] helped me tremendously. The process of
[51:33] following a complex solution is complex
[51:35] itself. So, if you want to lose a couple
[51:36] of pounds, let's say, and you have a
[51:38] calorie tracker, you have some
[51:40] electronic weights, you have an AI
[51:41] that's coaching you every day, that's
[51:43] more complexity to the process of losing
[51:46] weight. And that idea of always
[51:48] simplifying things is what reminded me
[51:50] of our sponsor, Boncharge. Boncharge's
[51:52] red light face mask uses optimal
[51:54] wavelengths of red light and near
[51:56] infrared light to support your skin's
[51:58] texture, tone, and elasticity. And the
[52:01] best part is you only need to wear it
[52:02] for about 10 or 20 minutes a day for a
[52:04] couple of weeks to notice a difference.
[52:06] And for a limited time, my listeners get
[52:08] 20% off when you order from
[52:09] bondcharge.com/dac.
[52:13] That's b o n c h a r g.com/doac.
[52:19] You'll also get free shipping and a
[52:20] 12-month warranty.
[52:23] The midterms are coming up.
[52:24] >> They are.
[52:26] >> For people that don't know what the
[52:27] midterms are, which is probably most of
[52:29] the world. Mhm.
[52:30] What is the significance of the midterms
[52:32] and what is it?
[52:33] >> Well, you're um electing a percentage uh
[52:37] of the US Senate and all of the House of
[52:40] Representatives. The House of
[52:41] Representatives each term is two years,
[52:43] senators are six years, and the Senate
[52:46] seats are staggered, right? So, you're
[52:48] you're doing a selection of them and
[52:50] then you're doing uh governors as well.
[52:53] And
[52:54] >> so, let me repeat this back to you. Tell
[52:55] me if I've got it right. So essentially
[52:56] in the midterms right now Trump has
[52:59] power because he controls the House and
[53:02] the Senate. Yep.
[53:03] >> In terms of there's more Republicans
[53:05] than Democrat Supreme Court
[53:06] >> and the Supreme Court. Um but in the
[53:08] midterms it's very likely that he will
[53:10] lose the Senate.
[53:13] >> That I don't know. There's much
[53:14] speculation suggest the polls were were
[53:18] originally he might well lose the House,
[53:20] maybe the Senate. Now it looks like
[53:21] both. But then um if he's going to be
[53:24] sending ICE agents to all the polling
[53:26] stations and uh and then people are
[53:29] going to walk away with the voting
[53:30] machines
[53:30] >> and he's offering people $5,000 if they
[53:32] vote for Republicans.
[53:33] >> Well, this is called the end of the
[53:35] norms. And if Americans it's you're it's
[53:38] going to be a national IQ test for the
[53:40] United States and on how they vote
[53:44] because every time they go to the pump,
[53:46] they know why their prices have gone up.
[53:48] What's sad is people um often identify
[53:51] with party. Parties come and go. The
[53:54] party the rep Republican party today
[53:56] isn't remotely what it was with
[53:57] Eisenhower or Ronald Reagan. It's a
[54:00] different party. It's all about one guy.
[54:02] And you should identify around what your
[54:05] goals are. And I recommend protect
[54:08] national security,
[54:10] promote prosperity. You can look at this
[54:12] war and go it's wrecked both. And
[54:14] whether you like the guy or don't, it's
[54:16] his fault. And it's the fault of the
[54:19] party that has enabled him at every
[54:21] point. And Pete Hgsathth, who's a major,
[54:24] right, is it's not it's an okay rank,
[54:26] but not to run the Pentagon. The
[54:29] Republican party confirmed him. It was
[54:31] an act of supreme dereliction of duty of
[54:34] doing that. They could have demanded
[54:36] another general mattis and we might not
[54:38] be in Iran today. And if Trump loses or
[54:42] the Republicans lose the midterms,
[54:44] essentially what it means is they are
[54:46] going to have to cooperate
[54:49] a lot with the Democrats because
[54:51] >> they're not going to cooperate. They've
[54:52] made clear they're not cooperating with
[54:53] Democrats.
[54:55] >> But to get things passed,
[54:56] >> that would be bipartisan. They've
[54:58] rejected being bipartisan. The the old
[55:01] Republican party. Yeah.
[55:02] >> But how do they get things passed then?
[55:03] >> They won't.
[55:04] >> But Trump has executive power, so he can
[55:06] still sign executive orders.
[55:08] >> Yeah. And he and um uh this is another
[55:11] um thing about Norms. He just does
[55:13] things and
[55:16] changes facts on the ground. If it later
[55:18] turns out to be illegal, he's already
[55:20] done the thing, right? Like there's this
[55:23] golf course in uh in that he cares about
[55:26] in Washington, he's cut down all the
[55:28] legacy trees. I mean, imagine what is
[55:31] it? Richmond Park in London. Imagine
[55:33] someone goes in there and just levels
[55:36] all the 800y old trees. There's no
[55:39] walking that back. That's how it that's
[55:42] what he does.
[55:44] Does the West have an enemy? And if so,
[55:46] who is the enemy? Because we often
[55:47] think, oh, it's China. Oh, it's Russia.
[55:49] Oh,
[55:49] >> yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It is um the Well,
[55:51] let's forget about the West. Let's talk
[55:52] about democratic core.
[55:54] >> Okay. What's democratic core?
[55:55] >> The democratic core in my books uh are
[55:58] the democracies. And so it's western,
[56:01] it's through central Europe, it would be
[56:04] uh Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, New
[56:08] Zealand, Australia, uh definitely
[56:10] Canada, the United States. Uh no, I
[56:14] mean, we're threatening to invade
[56:16] Greenland. That does not make you the
[56:18] Democratic core when you do that. You
[56:21] don't
[56:23] I mean, we're threatening to make Canada
[56:25] our 51st state. Who the hell does that?
[56:29] Why do you think Trump is saying that?
[56:30] >> I have no idea. I'm not a psychiatrist.
[56:33] Well, you follow his recent speeches.
[56:35] Can you follow them?
[56:36] >> Well, I'm asking you because you've
[56:37] studied dictators.
[56:39] >> Studied uh scenile narcissists. The
[56:42] problem with say little Taiwan and
[56:45] China. It's like why would Look at
[56:46] Taiwan. It's like 1250th the size of
[56:49] China. I mean, give me a break. It's a
[56:51] little teeny tiny place. Why does China
[56:53] give a damn? They're a bunch of
[56:54] Taiwanese sitting there. Why would you
[56:56] care?
[56:57] It's because it's showing that you can
[57:00] have a vibrant democracy in a h the
[57:04] propoundonderant ethnic group of China
[57:05] is the Han and their um rather racist
[57:09] ideas were that well the democracy is
[57:12] not and the Han are mutually exclusive.
[57:14] Well, the Taiwanese have proven that
[57:16] that's nonsense. And for these
[57:18] dictators, it's like why not hold a fair
[57:21] election, boys? Because they wouldn't be
[57:23] elected. That's why if there were fair
[57:26] elections, Xiinping would no more be the
[57:28] head of China, nor would Vladimir Putin
[57:30] be the head of Russia, right? And they
[57:32] regard that as the existential threat.
[57:35] On the other hand, what is it the sorts
[57:37] of societies that produce massive
[57:39] wealth? The democracies. Why? Because we
[57:44] tolerate each other. We give each other
[57:46] legal protections. We allow people to
[57:49] start their businesses and keep the
[57:51] fruits of their what they make from
[57:53] these businesses.
[57:55] Whereas these other folks, if you think
[57:58] about when China became wealthy, it's
[58:00] when it joined the maritime rules-based
[58:03] order and when it was following the
[58:06] rules. Now, it hasn't done it yet. It
[58:10] can compete compounding wealth, but not
[58:12] if it's going to be launching some wars.
[58:14] That'll be it.
[58:15] >> China seems to stay out of wars. What do
[58:17] you mean with Vietnam? It's been a
[58:19] while, but um uh China is created over a
[58:23] succession of wars. Basically, theQing
[58:26] dynasty falls in 1911, 1912, and then
[58:29] you have what's called the warlord
[58:31] period where all the different your
[58:33] provincial leaders are all duking it out
[58:34] with each other and eventually that
[58:37] coaleses into a bilateral communist
[58:41] nationalist fight uh circa 1927.
[58:45] So all that's going on in the background
[58:47] and then you have United States in its
[58:50] infinite wisdom, the first America
[58:52] firsters in 1930 in response to the
[58:54] Great Depression decide they're going to
[58:57] put huge tariffs up. And the economists
[58:59] come to President Hoover and say,
[59:00] "Buddy, don't do it because everyone
[59:02] else is going to respond in kind." And
[59:03] he does it anyway. And then we're into a
[59:06] massive trade war, right? America puts
[59:08] up tariffs. What do you suppose
[59:08] everyone's going to do? Put up their
[59:10] tariffs? And then you're tanking
[59:12] economies globally. It deepens the Great
[59:14] Depression. So here's trade dependent
[59:16] Japan going now what we always
[59:18] cooperated with these people and now
[59:19] they've shut us off. So they decide in
[59:21] those days the only solution is we need
[59:23] an empire large enough so that we can
[59:25] become self-sufficient. So they move
[59:27] into Manuria in 1931.
[59:30] So the reason why the Japanese attack
[59:32] Pearl Harbor later on is because the
[59:34] United States is sending aid to China
[59:38] and the Japanese want us to stop. So
[59:40] they attack Pearl Harbor, which in those
[59:42] days Hawaii is not a state, doesn't
[59:44] become a state until 59. Looks like it's
[59:45] a US colony. And they thought we'd wise
[59:47] up and quit. But no, we double down. We
[59:49] come after Japan. So think about it.
[59:51] Massive warfare that's tearing China
[59:53] apart starting right after 1911, 1912,
[59:57] continuing all the way through 1945.
[60:00] Then you have the Chinese Civil War that
[60:03] does not end until 1949.
[60:06] And then you have all of Ma's political
[60:08] campaigns,
[60:10] anti-right. Well, you have oh, you have
[60:11] the Korean War. That's the other one
[60:13] from 50 to 53. So, that's another uh
[60:16] war. And Dang Xiao Ping does his number
[60:18] on Vietnam. And that's it's costly and
[60:21] it's it's short and quick. And before
[60:24] then there's the 62 border war with
[60:26] India where uh Chinese trounce India and
[60:29] turn India into a permanent enemy. That
[60:31] was a mistake. Then you have anti-right
[60:34] campaigns, cultural revolution where Mao
[60:36] is churning things so that he remains in
[60:38] power. Oh, and while all that's going
[60:40] on, you have the great famine which is
[60:42] created by his great leap forward, keeps
[60:44] exporting food because that's where he
[60:45] gets his pocket change and people are
[60:46] starving. So after that, you think the
[60:50] Chinese want any more wars,
[60:53] right? They're they want to chill out of
[60:55] this thing for a while. But basically,
[60:57] all those people who did all that
[60:59] fighting and might have a sense that
[61:02] maybe you don't want to do any more of
[61:03] that, they're all dead.
[61:06] >> If we continue on in the direction of
[61:07] travel we're on now,
[61:10] what does the future look like?
[61:11] >> It looks like World War II. I mean, back
[61:14] to the negative objectives, you've got
[61:16] to prevent these things from breaking
[61:17] out because once they break out, look at
[61:20] Iran. Is Donald Trump going to want to
[61:22] back down? No. He's going to want to
[61:25] show that somehow he's won.
[61:27] >> This is a a chart showing how many
[61:30] nuclear warheads each country has. When
[61:33] you say that World War II could be next
[61:35] if we continue on this trajectory, my
[61:37] rebuttal is but we now live in a
[61:39] nuclearpowered world where where if any
[61:42] one of these players gets into a serious
[61:44] situation, they could basically wipe out
[61:46] life for everybody on planet Earth.
[61:47] >> Yeah. But
[61:48] >> so does this keep us safe to some
[61:49] degree?
[61:50] >> No.
[61:50] >> Mutually assured destruction. Putin has
[61:52] already uh taken that little thing and
[61:55] flipped it over when he um is
[61:57] threatening NATO countries. He has um
[62:00] been violating the airspace just in the
[62:02] last last few days sending drones into
[62:05] the territorial waters. I thought of
[62:06] Bulgarian Romania. You can correct me if
[62:08] I got that wrong and they were shot down
[62:10] there. At some point you're into article
[62:13] 5 territory. The Europeans don't want to
[62:15] do it because it it'll be an ever loving
[62:18] mess.
[62:19] >> Article five being
[62:21] Then you have to you all go to war
[62:24] together.
[62:25] >> That's part of NATO's treaty to
[62:26] >> defend. Well, that was the strength of
[62:29] it is while the generation who
[62:32] remembered World War II while they
[62:34] lived, they were really careful not to
[62:37] trigger that. And that's not true of who
[62:40] we've got now.
[62:41] >> If Putin invaded Poland, do you think
[62:43] World War II would begin?
[62:46] >> Uh,
[62:48] yeah.
[62:49] >> You think so? And what would World War
[62:50] II look look like? Cuz my memories are
[62:52] all
[62:53] >> I have no idea. But you can get on a
[62:55] nice computer program
[62:57] >> and you can pick your megat tonnage of
[63:00] your nuclear weapon and then you can put
[63:03] it over a city of your choice and you
[63:05] can look at how many people die. It's
[63:07] obscene. And this is the problem with
[63:11] having these dark personalities running
[63:13] countries like Putin. He doesn't care
[63:16] how many people he kills. There's a
[63:18] problem when people like that reach
[63:20] those positions,
[63:22] right? We human beings have real trouble
[63:26] uh identifying dark personalities until
[63:28] they become Adolf Hitler and go, "Oh,
[63:30] whoops. There are concentration camps
[63:31] going on here." And I think it's cuz
[63:34] most of us can't imagine wanting to
[63:36] inflict that kind of obscene pain on
[63:39] other people. But you can see the
[63:42] consequences of putting them in power.
[63:45] It's really ugly. Trump's not going to
[63:48] back out of Iran. It It doesn't sound
[63:50] like Putin's going to back out of the
[63:53] Ukraine.
[63:53] >> There is a solution for the United
[63:55] States is with the next Congress.
[63:57] Impeach and convict him and then just
[63:59] say, "Sweetheart, you're retired."
[64:01] >> Someone else is going to have to then
[64:03] step into his shoes.
[64:04] >> Well, yeah. This is the problem with the
[64:05] pivotal error. Whoever will do it uh
[64:08] will back out on really bad terms. And I
[64:11] think the Republicans want the Democrats
[64:13] to do that because then you can go blame
[64:14] the Democrats and said, "No, it's your
[64:17] war." In fact, on wars, look for those
[64:20] who start them. Those are the ones you
[64:22] want to blame, not for those who end
[64:24] them.
[64:25] >> How do you think history's going to
[64:26] remember Zillinsky?
[64:28] >> He's a hero for all time.
[64:31] Oh, he's he's you met a great statesman.
[64:34] There are very few of them. He's one of
[64:36] them. Yeah. Think of him. He could have
[64:39] left Ukraine, right?
[64:42] >> He told me Biden called him and offered
[64:44] him a ride.
[64:45] >> Yeah. What was the famous I don't want a
[64:47] ride. I want What is
[64:48] >> I want ammunition.
[64:50] >> Yeah.
[64:51] >> He's also um a a man who can really
[64:54] communicate and I cannot believe that
[64:58] we're not supporting him. It is the most
[65:00] one of the most clear-cut wars of
[65:02] aggression you can possibly imagine. And
[65:05] then the brutality with which the
[65:07] Russians are treating people. And you
[65:09] got to ask yourself, who are these
[65:11] people doing these sorts of things,
[65:14] there's something wrong with them. And
[65:17] you don't want them anywhere near the
[65:19] rest of Europe.
[65:22] And I get it. Um it's really scary, but
[65:25] it's scary because of these people,
[65:27] >> the Russians.
[65:28] >> Yeah. You need to uh get Ukraine totally
[65:32] on its feet and Russia to cease uh
[65:34] dropping uh ordinance on everybody and
[65:38] give them a massive time out from the
[65:40] middle powers that Carne and friends are
[65:43] busy organizing even as we speak.
[65:47] They've done a lot of work in the last
[65:48] few years
[65:50] and they'll do more.
[65:52] >> Do you think the world is pulling away
[65:54] from the United States? I mean, Europe
[65:56] and
[65:57] >> they're fleeing. So the United States
[65:59] takes good old Maduro. So what's
[66:01] everyone else doing? Well, when you have
[66:03] a heart attack like the United States
[66:04] can just take your leader away, what
[66:06] would you do? You're going to
[66:07] counterbalance with China as the less
[66:09] lunatic option. So here's the United
[66:12] States wanting to proclaim this a US
[66:15] preserve. Well, what we've done is
[66:16] guaranteed that uh these folks are going
[66:19] to be incredibly welcoming.
[66:20] >> Isn't that a real paradox of strength
[66:22] that the minute you use it, you kind of
[66:24] lose it in a weird way almost? Well,
[66:28] >> because them, United States really
[66:29] flexing their their power and
[66:31] threatening people and going into Iran
[66:33] and going into Venezuela has actually
[66:35] made everyone else feel less less safe
[66:38] and
[66:38] >> well, we've killed our power.
[66:40] >> So, they've gone and partnered with each
[66:41] other.
[66:42] >> Yeah.
[66:42] >> And actually, what do they call it?
[66:45] Peace through strength or strength
[66:46] through peace where you just
[66:47] >> strength through peace. But
[66:49] >> something like that. Yeah. Where you
[66:49] just
[66:50] >> I don't know.
[66:50] >> You everyone knows you're strong so you
[66:52] don't ever have to really prove it. And
[66:53] that's kind of what keeps up the
[66:54] illusion. If you look at global wars,
[66:58] war and what they are is over the nature
[67:00] of the world order of whether it's going
[67:02] to be these continentalists ruled by
[67:03] dictators who if you lived in Russia, if
[67:08] someone wants your business and if
[67:09] they're connected, that's it. They take
[67:11] your business. It just, oh, and by the
[67:13] way, you're going to be put on the front
[67:14] lines. You have no choice. It's just the
[67:16] way it goes. Or are we going to uh keep
[67:19] going with de democracies? And
[67:22] democracies are the only ones with
[67:23] really high per capita standards of
[67:25] living, right? Democracies are the ones
[67:27] that are really capable of generating
[67:29] wealth. It's been wonderful. And then
[67:32] there are many things that I find
[67:33] appalling, but as the United States is
[67:35] picking on immigrants,
[67:38] so they're worried about the oneoff
[67:39] illegal who murder someone, and that's
[67:41] terrible. I get it. But I'm thinking
[67:43] about the tech billionaire immigrants
[67:47] who are now buying our elections.
[67:50] Elon Musk has put $160 million into the
[67:54] state of Texas. He's a dysfunctional
[67:57] South African. What right does he have
[68:00] to buy our elections? I used to live in
[68:02] Texas and they have a saying, don't mess
[68:04] with Texas. Really? So, you want Elon to
[68:07] be messing with you in this way? And
[68:09] then the other ones as well. Uh there
[68:11] are many of the tech billionaires, not
[68:14] all of them, but many of them are
[68:15] foreignb born. No problem with that. No
[68:18] problem coming to the United States.
[68:19] every problem when you're trying to take
[68:21] down our democracy and just so you pay
[68:24] you're afraid of uh paying higher taxes.
[68:26] You're afraid of people regulating your
[68:30] media platforms so that that uh there's
[68:33] some way to uh slow down on the lies
[68:37] that are going through
[68:39] Americans miss it who in the dangerous
[68:41] immigrants are. There are a handful of
[68:43] them and they're trying to buy our
[68:44] elections right now. How dare they?
[68:48] I mean, in recent weeks as well, America
[68:49] seemed to have turned against Zillinsky
[68:52] and the Ukraine.
[68:53] >> America didn't. Donald Trump did.
[68:55] >> Donald Trump has. Certainly.
[68:56] >> Yeah. He's not America. He's himself.
[69:01] That's incredible. Yeah. He's killed the
[69:04] US legacy. Well, isn't he a guy who goes
[69:06] through serial bankruptcies and because
[69:08] he's rich and has lawyers, he just
[69:10] leaves the trash behind him and he moves
[69:13] forward.
[69:14] >> America did vote for him.
[69:16] >> Yeah. I a third of America voted for
[69:18] him, third of America didn't, and the
[69:21] other third wouldn't get off the couch.
[69:24] Uh they need to get off the couch. And
[69:27] reassessment, it's not a bad thing. It's
[69:30] sure Americans were correct that uh it's
[69:34] not working for Americans.
[69:37] Therefore, they wanted to they voted for
[69:38] the guy who was going to throw over the
[69:40] chessboard. Well, it turns out that was
[69:42] worse than the alternatives,
[69:45] right? And the thing is not to double
[69:47] down on uh that. Like for instance, if I
[69:51] buy a lousy pizza, I thought it looked
[69:53] really good. I'm not going to go tell
[69:54] you it's a good pizza. I'll tell you
[69:55] it's really lousy. I bought it here.
[69:57] Don't ever touch it. Okay. You do
[70:00] something really consequential like you
[70:02] vote for someone who gets into a war
[70:03] that's tanked the economy and then
[70:05] you're you're not going to reassess.
[70:07] I mean, isn't life that as you live you
[70:10] learn things? Like at your age, do you
[70:12] think you've learned everything you've
[70:13] going to learn for the rest of your
[70:14] life? That that everything that there is
[70:16] to know that in your life, you already
[70:18] know it right this moment.
[70:19] >> Of course not.
[70:19] >> Right. And it'd be like death in a way
[70:23] if this is it. And so presumably as you
[70:26] keep going, you'll go, "Oh, I used to
[70:27] think this, but now I think that."
[70:30] >> Do you know I'm I'm 34 years old now.
[70:32] I've just turned 34. And I say that in
[70:34] part because when I sit here and I hear
[70:36] people like yourself who understand
[70:38] history better than I do tell me that
[70:40] there's a danger or a threat of a World
[70:42] War II, there is part of me that has
[70:44] grown up with such privileged order that
[70:47] just can't imagine it.
[70:50] >> Amen.
[70:50] >> I can't imagine
[70:53] bombs flying over my head and I I've
[70:55] just never seen it before.
[70:56] >> Would you like for President Zilinsk's
[70:58] memories of the things he's had to look
[71:01] at?
[71:01] >> Yeah, he told me. Yeah, he started out
[71:03] like you. He hadn't seen any of this
[71:06] either
[71:07] and then he doesn't have the pleasure of
[71:10] averting his eyes. What is your message
[71:12] for people like me that have grown up in
[71:14] very sort of privileged western lives,
[71:16] democratic societies who are seeing all
[71:18] this stuff happen around the world now?
[71:20] And to some degree, I guess we're at
[71:22] risk of turning a blind eye because we
[71:25] we haven't we don't know history that
[71:26] well and our history is a short one and
[71:30] it's an orderly one and things happen
[71:32] but they happen far away.
[71:35] Well,
[71:37] I feel like starting on an apology uh
[71:40] that what my generation is leaving you
[71:44] is such a mess and you're supposed to
[71:47] make it better for the people who come
[71:49] after. And not all there many who've
[71:52] made it better, but currently the United
[71:54] States is making it a lot worse. And I
[71:56] cannot tell you the sorrow I feel for
[71:58] the negative things that the United
[72:01] States is uh doing right now on for
[72:05] young people is I urge you to read and
[72:10] to keep learning throughout your life to
[72:12] talk to other people, talk across these
[72:15] silos that divide us and be uh polite to
[72:19] each other
[72:21] and uh vote.
[72:24] get out there and vote and it's your
[72:27] civic duty. It isn't that hard. You can
[72:30] arrange your day so you can show up and
[72:33] vote.
[72:33] >> Do you not think there's just so much
[72:35] going I don't know whether this was
[72:36] always the case to history but for young
[72:37] people these days in part because we're
[72:39] so connected to the internet.
[72:40] >> We're seeing war over here in the Middle
[72:42] East. We're seeing war in Ukraine. We're
[72:44] seeing Iran. We're seeing this situation
[72:46] of of Gaza. We're seeing this thing
[72:48] called AI coming in and they're telling
[72:49] us we're going to have no bloody jobs.
[72:50] You got global warming over here and
[72:52] they say everything's going to flood or
[72:54] burn and forest fires everywhere. It's a
[72:57] lot.
[72:58] >> Yeah, it is a lot. But here's the flip
[73:00] is when I meet people and you've met
[73:03] many more people than I have with your
[73:04] job. There are many more wonderful
[73:06] people all over the world. The dark
[73:08] personality types are actually very few
[73:10] in number. and all the rest of us if we
[73:15] all do what we can in our various
[73:17] spheres cuz we all do different things
[73:20] we will get through this so I'm a
[73:22] retired professor what little can I do
[73:25] I can give you concepts ah go
[73:28] disinformation that's what Putin does
[73:31] then when you believe it but don't know
[73:35] it's lies you're spreading
[73:36] misinformation so uh that's a problem
[73:40] >> what other concepts haven't we covered
[73:42] that are pertinent.
[73:43] >> Oh, I know what we haven't covered. All
[73:45] right. So, let's talk about tactical
[73:48] level. Tactile.
[73:51] Anyway, the tact the tactical level of
[73:55] war would be I got a tank. It has
[73:58] certain capabilities, certain range.
[74:00] It's got certain armor. Certain things
[74:01] can take it out. Oh. Oh, you I love it.
[74:04] >> Got a little tank down here.
[74:05] >> Guys in there.
[74:08] Thanks. Okay. But then at the
[74:12] operational level, you're either going
[74:13] to fight a battle or succession of
[74:15] battles, which is called a campaign. And
[74:17] then you're going to put together tank
[74:18] units and other different units. And
[74:20] you're going to use, I don't know, have
[74:21] an information campaign, whatever. And
[74:24] it's probably to take that hill or do
[74:27] whatever. But then there's a level that
[74:30] really counts, just this one, the
[74:31] strategic level. Like, why are you
[74:33] fighting in the first place? It's like,
[74:35] hey, Donald, what are you doing in in
[74:37] Iran? So at the strategic level for
[74:41] politicians, it should be protecting our
[74:43] national security and promoting national
[74:46] prosperity. That's what it should be.
[74:47] And in the war in Iran, you're worried
[74:50] about non-prololiferation. Except that
[74:52] war is incentivizing proliferation in
[74:54] the worst possible way. And it's doing
[74:56] it in an incredibly costly way. So
[74:58] here's the problem with the Republican
[75:00] party. this war and the guy who's
[75:04] running it and his truly incompetent
[75:06] administration,
[75:08] they have enabled him to do all these
[75:10] things that have by blowing our alliance
[75:13] system. That's the alliance system that
[75:15] would protect their children and their
[75:16] grandchildren. It's bad for them. So
[75:19] they're at the operation. So now we're
[75:20] going to apply this to politics because
[75:22] we're not doing war. You can have
[75:24] tactics
[75:26] which might be oh since you were talking
[75:28] to President Zilinski. So, one tactic
[75:30] which I've described before is when
[75:32] Trump had him in that Oval Office evil
[75:35] interview where the two native English
[75:37] speakers, Trump and Vance, are going
[75:38] after Zilinsky, who must have thought it
[75:40] was a routine photo op and they're
[75:42] trying to humiliate him in public. You
[75:44] remember this? So, that would be a
[75:45] tactic, right? Other tactics would be
[75:49] denying who uh who won the election. Joe
[75:52] Biden won the election. The evidence is
[75:54] in on that. All the rest of its lies at
[75:58] politics operational level is you got to
[76:00] win the election. So that's where the
[76:03] Republicans are all focused right here.
[76:05] They're going if we dump the orange guy,
[76:09] we won't get reelected. Maybe in fact,
[76:12] if you dump the orange guy in first
[76:15] term, it would have been so much better
[76:16] for you. Or better yet, don't support
[76:19] him in the second term. He's so much
[76:21] better for you. You'd actually have a
[76:22] functioning Republican party on your
[76:23] hands. Instead, you've killed the party
[76:26] and you've destroyed your children's
[76:27] futures. Who the hell does that? It's
[76:29] focusing on this operational level. So,
[76:31] officers, they love focusing on the
[76:34] operational level. They want to use this
[76:37] to kill a lot of people and go, "Ah,
[76:38] when I kill more of your guys than you
[76:40] kill my guys, must mean I won." Oh,
[76:43] really? Vietnam war? They took a
[76:44] multiple of our casualties. They won
[76:46] that thing. There's no South Vietnamese
[76:47] government left. you know, the people
[76:50] with this Ukraine Russia situation that
[76:51] say, well, you know, NATO promised it
[76:54] wouldn't encroach on Russia's borders
[76:56] and it came closer and closer and
[76:58] closer. So, those people might say,
[76:59] well, you know,
[77:00] >> they do say you're you're um repeating
[77:02] uh Putin's propaganda points.
[77:04] >> Yes.
[77:06] All right, let's let's do the history of
[77:08] all of this. First of all, the United
[77:11] States didn't go around and try and
[77:15] stronging our arm everyone and say you
[77:17] must join NATO. You must join NATO.
[77:18] Absolutely the opposite. These folks
[77:20] were stampeding to NATO's doors.
[77:23] >> Which folks?
[77:24] >> Everybody who was in the Soviet block.
[77:27] So Germany used to be divided, but you
[77:29] have Poland and Czechoslovakia used to
[77:32] be one thing, but um Austria was
[77:34] neutral, but Hungary and then Yugoslavia
[77:37] was bigger. Anyway, all those pieces,
[77:39] Romania, uh Bulgaria, at the end of the
[77:42] Cold War, all those people wanted NATO
[77:45] in the worst possible way. Why? because
[77:48] they know Russia wants empire and
[77:50] already what Russia's doing is they're
[77:53] bringing in all their cadres whom they
[77:56] trained during the war and they're like
[77:58] Bulgarian communist expats Romanians uh
[78:01] Hungarians putting them in place and
[78:03] then they're taking over the power
[78:05] ministries which are the military
[78:08] department of war whatever it's called
[78:10] because that determines whom you can
[78:11] shoot in those places it's the interior
[78:13] ministry in our country it would be the
[78:15] justice department because that's who
[78:17] gets arrested and you control the
[78:18] courts. And then the if there's an
[78:21] information ministry in those days, uh
[78:23] you want to control who has access to to
[78:26] information. And then also they wanted
[78:28] agriculture because when you're going to
[78:30] um collectivize and deolctivize, that's
[78:32] going to determine patronage
[78:34] possibilities. So our generals are
[78:35] writing back and going, they're doing
[78:37] all this stuff and we can't stop them.
[78:40] And so they do it throughout Eastern
[78:43] Europe. Uh they wind up doing uh massive
[78:46] purges of people who had run for other
[78:49] parties, murdering loads of them,
[78:52] murdering many leaders. I'm not kidding.
[78:53] They're murdering people. They're
[78:55] putting people in jail forever. And then
[78:56] they say, "You have to do this communist
[78:58] thing." And so they're stuck with it.
[79:01] And then there are Germans who aren't
[79:03] too happy with it and the Russians are
[79:05] beating them up in 53. And then you have
[79:09] uh Hungarians saying, "Look, we we we
[79:11] need to do some adjustments here because
[79:13] the communist thing isn't working.
[79:15] They're correct. Russians send tanks and
[79:17] they shoot their head head of state even
[79:19] though they promised they wouldn't." And
[79:21] the Russians have never atoned for what
[79:23] they did and never acknowledged all of
[79:24] this. And so now they've made up this
[79:26] story that you're purveying that you get
[79:28] from others that, oh, it's NATO
[79:30] expansion that did all of this. And I
[79:33] think I've given you serious facts to
[79:36] tell you why people living in these
[79:38] countries were terrified of Russians. Uh
[79:41] they're brutal when they come in.
[79:43] They're incompetent. So I was living in
[79:46] the Soviet Union when it still was 88
[79:48] 89. So this is early Gorbachop at the
[79:50] supply systems uh falling apart and went
[79:54] into one of their grocery stores and it
[79:56] had about total of 77 items. And I think
[79:58] that compares to, I don't know, a candy
[80:01] rack as you're exiting some convenience
[80:03] store,
[80:04] >> right? If you went by the meat counters,
[80:07] the smell from the rotting meat just
[80:08] about knocked you down and you just
[80:10] avoided all of that. And then
[80:12] occasionally they would have items
[80:13] called import na import it. I.e.
[80:16] anything from anywhere else is better
[80:18] than what we've got because you're just
[80:20] you can sell it on the basis of calling
[80:22] it imported. I was eating rotting
[80:26] Hungarian apples because at least they
[80:28] could uh produce apples. I made
[80:30] applesauce. Oh, it was the Romanians who
[80:33] made some pretty good canned tomatoes.
[80:35] It was just incredible what the Russians
[80:37] couldn't do. So, I mean, I think I got
[80:40] the evidence of why uh the reason these
[80:44] people
[80:46] uh want to be part of NATO is because of
[80:48] what Russia does. So, Russia looks at
[80:50] the entire world. So, I've talked about
[80:52] half court tennis. boy, that's uh
[80:53] they're like half court, whatever it is
[80:55] up there. They look at it as that
[80:57] everyone else is picking on us instead
[81:00] of excuse me, uh have you ever
[81:02] threatened other people? Have you ever
[81:04] done anything vaguely naughty to anybody
[81:06] else?
[81:08] Right? It's huge what they've done to
[81:11] other people. And then they have the
[81:13] nerve to say that these people are
[81:16] threatening them. Excuse look how large
[81:17] it is.
[81:19] >> Russia,
[81:19] >> why do you need more territory?
[81:22] Why can't you develop what you have? I
[81:24] mean, a great example is talk about a
[81:26] lousy piece of real estate. Let's look
[81:28] at the Scandinavian countries. They
[81:30] aren't whining.
[81:32] And look what they've done with their
[81:34] resources.
[81:36] They're these fabulous functioning
[81:38] states. Russia could have done that.
[81:41] Instead, it's trying to steal things
[81:43] from others.
[81:44] So, for your friend, the further back
[81:48] you stop these people, the safer you
[81:50] are. Also, why should Ukrainians become
[81:54] the slaves of their murderers?
[81:57] Why? Why? What? What's so privileged
[82:00] about you and Britain that you can just
[82:03] sort of go, "Oh, well, that's great. Who
[82:04] cares?"
[82:07] Morals matter.
[82:09] And this is where the norms matter.
[82:11] Honesty matters. I can be wrong. By all
[82:14] means, let me know that I'm wrong and
[82:15] I'll try to square it away.
[82:20] But
[82:21] hear other people out.
[82:24] Keep doing what you're doing. Uh you
[82:26] need to have accurate information from
[82:28] many points of view so that people can
[82:31] come to their own conclusions. What
[82:33] Americans have done is forgotten their
[82:35] core values which are in a nasty doc
[82:39] document from your point of view. It's
[82:40] the declaration of independence. But in
[82:43] there it talks about the rights of life
[82:47] and it's not the the right to take
[82:50] someone else's life but preserve your
[82:52] own liberty. Not the liberty for me to
[82:55] tell you what to do but the liberty for
[82:57] me to make my own choices and pursuit of
[83:00] happiness. Not as you define it but as I
[83:02] define it.
[83:03] >> It appears in the last week or two
[83:06] because I think it was diesel prices in
[83:08] particular gone up at the pump to
[83:10] something like $6. Trump has made a deal
[83:12] with Putin for diesel exports in part
[83:16] because of his war in Iran has caused
[83:19] this sort of global energy.
[83:21] >> Oh, this is disinformation. Really
[83:23] >> the disinformation. Russia has no
[83:25] capacity to export diesel in sufficient
[83:29] quantities to make any difference
[83:31] whatsoever. The correlation for when
[83:34] diesel prices go up is with the Iran
[83:37] war. once the Iran war hits and it has
[83:40] to do with who produces what grades of
[83:42] oil there and what kind of refineries
[83:44] they have in order to refined diesel
[83:47] because refineries apparently are set up
[83:49] to produce certain grades of output. And
[83:52] yes, you can change a refinery to do a
[83:55] different grade output, but I believe
[83:56] you're talking millions of dollars in a
[83:59] certain amount of time to redo your
[84:00] refinery. So, the diesel stuff is
[84:04] absolutely Trump's war's fault. And he's
[84:08] trying to blame Ukraine. It's
[84:11] despicable.
[84:14] As usual, he's lying.
[84:17] And so, Americans, really, you want the
[84:19] liar and chief. How well has it worked
[84:21] for you? Really? I mean, are your
[84:23] grocery prices, are they better or are
[84:27] they worse? Are they better in the last
[84:29] two years or they gotten dramatically
[84:31] worse in the last two years? I think
[84:32] it's pretty obvious. I was at the
[84:34] supermarket recently and oatmeal was
[84:37] like $10 for a little dumb package of
[84:39] it. Mindblowing. Just mind-blowing.
[84:43] Thank you, Donald Trump. And then
[84:44] tariffing all this food imports from
[84:46] Mexico and Canada.
[84:49] Uh
[84:52] I'm not making it up, right? I haven't
[84:55] been I never used to be partisan.
[84:57] Uh, but I'm looking at the Republican
[85:00] party and thinking, how can you do this?
[85:02] It's your children, too.
[85:06] You're wrecking the United States, and
[85:09] you're doing it not temporarily, but
[85:11] you're doing it for as long as anyone
[85:13] who's alive at this moment and will
[85:15] remember it.
[85:18] >> Can the Ukraine win against Russia?
[85:21] Sure,
[85:23] it is winning right now
[85:24] >> because it's able to defend itself.
[85:27] >> Ukrainians have developed all these
[85:29] different kinds of drones and I get it.
[85:30] Starlink's uh messing up with some of
[85:32] their interceptors, but they've been
[85:35] developing uh ballistic missiles that
[85:37] are going to happen rapidly. And oh, the
[85:39] United States um by Musk doing the kill
[85:43] switch on Tus Starlink has made it. So,
[85:46] no one's going to be serious is going to
[85:48] be buying Starlink. India was thinking
[85:49] of it. It's like no, not if in the
[85:52] middle of the war you're going to turn
[85:53] it off. And what is it? The shares for
[85:55] whatever the French alternate company is
[85:58] has gone way up in the last few days.
[86:00] You can check whether I got this right,
[86:02] but people are looking at going, "Okay,
[86:04] so Elon maybe short-term gain but
[86:06] longtime loss on all of this." And then
[86:08] for US Patriot Missile Systems, if
[86:11] Franklin Delanor Roosevelt had been
[86:13] president during the Biden
[86:14] administration when the second phase of
[86:16] the Ukraine war kicked off, he would
[86:18] have u ma gotten that company to
[86:20] massproduce it and saying, "Look, you're
[86:22] not going to make be making your money
[86:24] on unit cost. You're going to be making
[86:25] it on the quantity."
[86:26] >> But people are saying, you know, with
[86:28] Trump turning his back on Zalinsky and
[86:31] Putin being in bed with China and
[86:33] President Xi there, Zalinsky has no
[86:36] chance.
[86:36] >> No. That's bull. Uh, no. He's um
[86:39] developing his own uh missile systems.
[86:43] Russia can't replace it can't afford to
[86:45] replace all these refineries. It's based
[86:47] on Western tech.
[86:49] >> The oil refiner.
[86:50] >> Yeah. I I can't remember what percentage
[86:52] of the refining capacity that Russia's
[86:55] down to. I don't know whether it's less
[86:56] than half now, slightly more than half.
[86:58] You can Google and get the data. And
[87:01] then um the Ukrainians have gone after
[87:03] Yandex and whatever their their their
[87:06] equivalent of Goo uh Google and um
[87:08] blowing away these things.
[87:10] >> Russia has lost up to 50% of its
[87:12] operating oil refinery.
[87:14] >> I was telling I didn't know cuz it it
[87:16] varies right they start fixing it then
[87:18] another one gets hit and uh Ukraine and
[87:21] Ukraine's doing that on on its lonesome.
[87:24] know Starlink involved in that just
[87:26] because it's over Russia Russian
[87:27] territory and they're developing stuff
[87:29] more rapidly and who's be buying all
[87:31] these because they're producing more
[87:32] than enough of some of these things.
[87:34] They're going to be the go-to defense
[87:35] supplier cuz our the stuff in the United
[87:37] States is way too expensive and this
[87:39] Patriot stuff uh this is why it's just
[87:42] breathtakingly incompetent. The fact
[87:43] that we have a shortage of these
[87:45] interceptors and this fighting has been
[87:46] going on for any number of years.
[87:48] Franklin Delanor Roosevelt uh started
[87:51] telling people how many tens of
[87:53] thousands of airplanes he won and people
[87:54] thought he was nuts and he got the
[87:56] businessmen around the table. What do
[87:58] you need? You going to make it happen?
[87:59] It happened.
[88:00] >> Do you think if funding does dry up for
[88:03] Zillinsky, external funding from Europe
[88:05] and from the United States?
[88:07] >> I don't think it will from Europe. Why?
[88:08] Because Europe um Russia will be coming
[88:11] for the rest of Europe. It will be
[88:13] coming. They are on death ground too
[88:16] with Putin's little model.
[88:18] If you think about how European
[88:19] attitudes on security changed on a dime
[88:22] because of the 2022 war, that hasn't
[88:25] changed.
[88:27] And I don't know what all the there's
[88:29] tremendous disinformation that good old
[88:31] Vlad the Bad is putting out to get
[88:33] people thinking that he's winning. He's
[88:36] not. He's wrecking his country. So, I
[88:40] have no idea whether his his little
[88:41] friends will uh put something special in
[88:43] his breakfast some morning. Probably
[88:45] not. Uh he's under enormous stress at
[88:48] 74. I don't know. I wouldn't want to be
[88:50] living with his stress levels. Wrong age
[88:52] for it. And uh alternatively, at what
[88:56] point do the young men at the front
[88:59] lines riot? At what point uh did they
[89:03] take their guns and just go after their
[89:04] commanders?
[89:06] >> I mean, we saw that almost happen,
[89:08] didn't we, with um
[89:09] >> Preosian?
[89:10] >> Progosian. Yeah.
[89:11] >> Yeah. Um at what point does that happen?
[89:13] And also when when you think about these
[89:15] kids that are being sent to the front,
[89:17] they're only children. This is not
[89:20] Russia and Stalin's day, the pre-birth
[89:22] control Russia,
[89:25] right there. These are very special
[89:28] young men that are going to the front.
[89:30] They're the only ones.
[89:32] And there's also at what point that
[89:34] their mothers put their foot down.
[89:37] The economic cost of the war in Ukraine
[89:39] on Russia has been profound, shifting
[89:40] the nation's economy towards a
[89:42] high-risisk war footing where record
[89:44] defense spending consuming roughly 40%
[89:47] of the national budget boosts artificial
[89:49] GDP numbers while draining funds from
[89:52] health, education, and civil
[89:53] infrastructure. The heavy state spending
[89:55] coupled with acute labor shortages
[89:56] caused by military mobilization and the
[89:59] >> immigration of hundreds of thousands of
[90:02] skilled professionals triggered
[90:04] persistent inflation and forced the
[90:05] central bank of Russia to hike interest
[90:08] rates above 20%. Simultaneously, Russia
[90:11] lost its lucrative European energy
[90:12] export market saw 300 billion in central
[90:14] bank reserves frozen by Western
[90:17] sanctions and faced severe domestic fuel
[90:20] shortages following repeated longrange
[90:22] drone strikes to its oil refineries
[90:23] which have caused oil refinery capacity
[90:26] to drop by up to 50%.
[90:28] >> So that's called winning a war? I don't
[90:30] think so.
[90:32] >> They can't go on like that forever.
[90:34] >> No. Uh they can't. So, but as long as
[90:38] Vladimir Putin lives, he will keep doing
[90:41] it. And apparently his cronies there
[90:44] want to go are going to go down with the
[90:45] ship. The offramp would be um uh for the
[90:49] the West under the table to offer them
[90:52] something like a safe page passage out
[90:54] with however many billions they need in
[90:56] return for giving Vladimir Putin a
[90:59] retirement plan.
[91:01] >> Who is our enemy?
[91:02] >> The continentalists. So, China and
[91:04] Russia,
[91:05] >> United States, Donald Trump is what the
[91:07] future is. Yeah. I mean, tell telling
[91:11] Canada we're going to take take them
[91:13] over.
[91:14] It's either a really bad joke, which I
[91:17] don't think it is, or it's actually
[91:19] where Donald Trump lives.
[91:22] And we have a Republican party that
[91:24] hasn't thrown him out of office for
[91:26] doing that. So, the democracy,
[91:29] >> what is it? It's I think it's
[91:31] apocryphal, but it's a pretty good one
[91:33] of of uh Churchill that uh democracy is
[91:36] the worst system of government except
[91:38] for all the alternatives, right? Because
[91:40] it's messy and you're arguing all the
[91:42] time and the people like Xiinping will
[91:45] think, oh no, we're superior because we
[91:47] got this orderly thing except you guys
[91:49] double down on poor decisions and you
[91:51] keep doing the same thing and the longer
[91:53] you do it, the worse it gets. and the
[91:55] young in Chinese China are not happy
[91:57] with the way things are. The much better
[92:00] thing is really multi-party system
[92:04] accept the outcome of elections try
[92:05] harder the next time and uh
[92:09] uh allow pe have um try to keep
[92:11] developing fairer and fairer laws and
[92:14] rules.
[92:16] >> Is it possible for Russia to have a
[92:19] democratic leader do you think after
[92:21] Putin?
[92:22] >> Not anytime soon. I think the story is
[92:25] that Russians today are actually for the
[92:27] war. I've never heard that there are a
[92:29] bunch of Russians who think that they
[92:31] shouldn't own Ukraine. I've never heard
[92:34] that there is a there's a Russians who
[92:36] think that the costs of the war they
[92:39] don't like and they don't want to lose
[92:40] children in Ukraine, but I've never
[92:43] heard any of that Russians think it's a
[92:45] bad idea to uh take Ukraine or that
[92:50] >> so what happens when Putin dies? What is
[92:52] the system in Russia? And is there an
[92:54] election, a democratic election? Is it?
[92:56] >> Give me a break. No, it's a
[92:58] free-for-all. Think about how do you
[93:00] have a democratic election? Uh you have
[93:02] all these institutions for how the votes
[93:04] are counted. And uh look at the United
[93:06] States. We're having trouble. We have
[93:09] these deeply embedded
[93:11] democratic institutions. And now we're
[93:14] wondering about who's going to be
[93:15] fiddling around with accounting. So
[93:18] Russia's got none of uh that. They're
[93:22] Putin's really good at doctoring his
[93:23] elections. So, no, you're going to have
[93:25] So, he dies. All right. How to think
[93:27] about this? Think of him like a family
[93:30] tree. There's Vlad the Bad up top or
[93:32] like he's sort of like a mafia dawn and
[93:34] then he has his concigliary underneath
[93:36] them, right? And then they've got their
[93:38] concigliary underneath them. And so,
[93:41] there's this whole network. So, when you
[93:43] he dies, he's gone. And then it's which
[93:46] one of these guys or is it someone from
[93:47] over here who's going to take over? And
[93:50] you know what? They don't know either,
[93:53] >> right? And it's a massive freefor-all.
[93:56] And now we got a lot of Russians with
[93:58] military training, which wasn't the case
[94:00] before. And whom are they going to line
[94:02] up with?
[94:03] >> So there might be a bit of a civil war
[94:05] in terms
[94:06] >> possible, unknown. But what it means is
[94:09] profound instability for and then it's a
[94:12] Humpty Dumpty situation. It takes a
[94:14] while to put Humpty Dumpty back together
[94:15] again. That's where I think in terms of
[94:18] these dictatorships, depending how bad
[94:20] the shatter is, it'll take longer to put
[94:22] it together, but I'm going to make up a
[94:23] number and say 10 years. So, the de
[94:26] democratic corps should have a plan for
[94:28] when various dictators die. It's why you
[94:31] have a war pen. You just have them on
[94:32] the shelf so that when the unexpected
[94:35] event finally happens on the day you
[94:36] never knew, you've got at least some
[94:38] previous thinking and then you have got
[94:39] something to start like a first draft
[94:41] where you adjust it. But we ought to be
[94:43] thinking in these terms. It could be
[94:45] worse as in someone else could go in
[94:47] there. That that's even more.
[94:48] >> Oh, you could have loose nukes. That was
[94:51] the the fear at the break up of the
[94:53] Soviet Union as all these loose nukes
[94:55] and that was one of the reasons they
[94:56] were taken away from Ukraine and Ukraine
[94:59] was willing to have it taken away
[95:01] because we promised to protect them and
[95:04] we broke that promise. That's a problem
[95:08] because if you want to be a big boy on
[95:10] the block, if your promises mean
[95:12] nothing, I mean, this is where uh
[95:14] Trump's having trouble with leverage
[95:15] over Ukraine since they know that he's
[95:18] uh he's sold them out and he's always
[95:19] going to sell them out. It's like it
[95:21] means he has no leverage over them.
[95:23] >> It's over.
[95:25] It was back to your comment about power
[95:28] that um the best strategies, the ones
[95:31] that really work are win-win. So that
[95:33] you get something out of it, I get
[95:35] something out of it. So, of course,
[95:36] we'll do it. And that's why the uh
[95:39] maritime order is strong. If it's a
[95:42] win-win, everyone plays well together.
[95:45] And you look at Europe, they've been
[95:47] each country's been pwning up to help
[95:49] Ukraine and one at a time and sometimes
[95:54] together.
[95:55] >> What is the most important thing that's
[95:57] happening in the world at the moment
[95:58] that we haven't talked about? Dr. Sarah
[96:00] Pay,
[96:00] >> wars are negative some. They destroy
[96:04] wealth incredibly rapidly.
[96:08] The only infinite game positive sum
[96:10] world order is a maritime. It's maritime
[96:14] because what is it? 90% of the world's
[96:17] trade goes by these oceans. This is how
[96:19] you the world's original network that
[96:21] reaches everything or these seas, right?
[96:23] Uh containership will take 21,000
[96:26] containers whereas a tutu train I don't
[96:29] know 600 if you're containers if you're
[96:31] lucky. Yeah. this is the efficient way
[96:33] to get things around. As flawed as
[96:35] international institutions are, um they
[96:38] are the feasible thing that avoid this.
[96:42] If you get into this, it's all over. So,
[96:44] better to build institutions and if you
[96:47] can't reform the UN to make it better,
[96:49] then you create a parallel institution
[96:51] and then your government gradually says,
[96:53] "Hey, we're not no longer doing the
[96:55] office in New York City. We're moving to
[96:57] whatever this new one is." All right.
[96:59] You care about Weaguers. This is uh the
[97:01] Chinese practicing genocide. When
[97:04] Xiinping came to power in 2012.
[97:09] Uh by the next year he was summoning his
[97:11] experts on the Soviet Union said well
[97:14] what happened? Because the last thing
[97:15] the Communist Party of China wanted is
[97:17] to go the way of the Communist Party of
[97:19] the Soviet Union. And what they told him
[97:22] is that the Soviet Union had been
[97:24] organized on the basis of ethnicity. And
[97:27] what the Russians had always had a
[97:29] Russian who ran each of these places and
[97:31] the ministries and things within them,
[97:34] but then the number two would be the
[97:36] token number two. And then they would
[97:38] sponsor all kinds of dictionaries and
[97:40] the USBC language and you could do your
[97:42] folk dances and your embroidery and all
[97:44] that stuff. And while the Soviet Union
[97:46] was holding it together, it looked
[97:47] great. But when it shattered, it meant
[97:49] it was really easy for it to shatter on
[97:51] these ethnic lines.
[97:54] And Xiin Ping, I suspect that explains
[97:56] his genocide of all the Muslims. And
[97:59] then the Weaguers, what he's done is
[98:01] he's put the men into concentration
[98:04] camps, the children into what this
[98:06] country used to do to Native American
[98:08] children. It's terrible. Putting them
[98:10] under these schools where you're you're
[98:12] creating it's it's cultural genocide.
[98:14] You're bringing them up to be like
[98:15] honorary white people. And so they're
[98:18] bringing up these kids to be honorary
[98:20] Han. And then the women, I don't know,
[98:22] white slavery, whatever it is, uh cuz
[98:24] China's got a shortage of women of
[98:27] childbearing age.
[98:30] >> You've written so many fantastic books.
[98:32] I've got several of them here. I'm going
[98:34] to link everybody to your lectures um
[98:37] online, the full length lectures online.
[98:38] So, if you're listening right now, you
[98:40] can see a link below to Sarah's full
[98:42] length lectures or 14 of them.
[98:45] >> No, there's seven. Well, there are other
[98:47] things that people have posted. It would
[98:49] be the Sarah Payne lecture series. And
[98:52] you can see the logos on top. They have
[98:54] this kind of look to them. And they
[98:56] start with zero and then they go 1 2 3 4
[98:59] 5 6 7 and then there's finale. So there
[99:01] are nine total.
[99:02] >> What an interesting time to be someone
[99:04] who has
[99:06] >> your experience in education. How does
[99:08] that feel? I mean you studied digital
[99:10] life and now it's the topic of
[99:11] conversation.
[99:12] >> Well when I was a little younger than
[99:13] you, I thought I want to learn about
[99:16] Russia and China. It'll take me a long
[99:19] time.
[99:20] >> Why did you come?
[99:21] >> Oh, because I'm born in 57. That's the
[99:24] year Sputnik went up. And
[99:27] >> Sputnik being
[99:27] >> Yeah. this um satellite where the
[99:30] Russians put a little dog who was on a
[99:33] one-way trip. They sent Leica up there.
[99:36] And uh and the United States was
[99:39] terrified because this meant that the
[99:41] Russians could eventually have ballistic
[99:43] missiles coming after us. And we were
[99:46] behind on all of that. And that's when
[99:48] the Cold War. So you could argue, you
[99:49] can pick your year when you think the
[99:51] height of the Cold War would be, but
[99:52] that might be one of them. So that's the
[99:54] year I'm born. And I grew up where
[99:56] everyone's talking about Russia being
[99:58] the evil empire and curious about that
[100:02] and growing up as a little kid during
[100:04] the Vietnam War and then uh watching
[100:07] that unfold poorly and I thought, well,
[100:10] I want to learn more about this.
[100:12] >> Dr. Sarah Pane, we have a closing
[100:13] tradition on this podcast where the last
[100:14] guest leaves a question for the next not
[100:16] knowing who they're leaving it for.
[100:17] >> Oh no.
[100:18] >> And the question left for you is, what
[100:20] makes you emotional?
[100:22] >> What makes me emotional?
[100:25] >> Sorrow.
[100:30] Watching sorrow. Watching other people
[100:32] suffering,
[100:36] watching children suffering.
[100:38] Why should they?
[100:41] We have adults that are willing to allow
[100:44] tremendous numbers of children to
[100:45] suffer.
[100:47] Like go back to the Republicans. You
[100:50] need to make it better for children for
[100:52] the generations that follow.
[100:55] So you lose the next election. Do the
[100:58] right thing. It's past due.
[101:02] Don't support continentalists.
[101:05] And I'll say it over and over again.
[101:09] What is more important than the
[101:11] generations that follow?
[101:13] Nothing.
[101:15] So do something for them instead of
[101:18] grifting.
[101:20] >> Dr. Sarah Bane, thank you so much.
[101:22] >> Thank you for having me. YouTube have
[101:25] this new crazy algorithm where they know
[101:26] exactly what video you would like to
[101:29] watch next based on AI and all of your
[101:31] viewing behavior. And the algorithm says
[101:33] that this video is the perfect video for
[101:36] you. It's different for everybody
[101:37] looking right now. Check this video out
[101:39] and I bet you, you might love it.
