@@David_Lloyd-Joneswait, he isn’t even president yet and he got rid of Trudeau, did a cease fire in Palestine, is getting the hostages released, the fda after yrs is now removing red dye from food, has slowed illegal immigration and will soon end the Ukrainian Russian war. You are clueless!
Niall Ferguson is one of those people who convince me that Dietrisch Bonhoeffer knew what he was talking about when he concluded that stupidity is linked to moral issues (For example, those who think that Free Speech is a right to believe in lies) rather than linked to intellegence.
@@elbacr9501 Niall is just another one of those political commentators who try to appear to be objective but anything that may diminish his speaker opportunities, almost entirely in the Western media, he intentionally presents only 1-sided dimension to align with the political discourse of the day.
Ferguson gets called out on always supporting the worst decisions of the U.S. government, and then rather than owning up to his mistakes, he'll reference how he said something different in other writings.
To be fair if you read Colossus, he does not think the Iraq invasion would be a success because he believed America is inherently uncomfortable with imperialism. It would fail for 3 reasons in his estimation 1) American doesn’t have the manpower of people who want to spent decades in places with Iraq to establish deep relations and help then set up strong institutions 2) the media attention in the US is so lacking that he doesn’t properly inform its citizens on the importance of things like Iraq War and the need to have a long term presence 3) the nature of Amercian democracy, means that bi-annual election prompts politicians to set short term leaving dates on interventions (with a ‘quick fix’ mindset) when in reality a longer term presence is needed. 4) lack of fiscal power, due to high welfare and debt
@@michaelmccomb2594 All good points. But then it was pointed out in this interview that he supported the Iraq invasion. Apparently, these objections weren't strong enough for him to not support it.
@@alvinseah5423 But he still seems to throw his support publicly behind some of the U.S.‘s worst decisions. Seems to be a "two-faced" public intellectual - supporting crazy and brutal U.S. invasions, but then later pointing to his work questioning them.
Have we really benefited (in Australia) from globalisation and free trade liberalism? We have practically zero manufacturing, huge market concentration in all areas of the economy, and we're probably the MOST expensive country in the world when it comes to cost of living. What Niall said at the 21st minute, similarities apply here. And the major parties wonder why their primary vote is getting lower all the time.
Australia relies on selling commodities and trade with the rest of the world has made Australia rich. It is naive to think you haven't benefitted from globalistion or from free trade liberalism.
glad people are finally discovering what a flip-flopping joker this Niall Ferguson guy is. pretty pathetic human being. Glad the neo-con view is losing steam in the US. Hopefully he can be contained to England.
In 2015, Trump was not the sole political voice talking about the harm globalization had done to middle America - Bernie Sanders was talking about that for at least six years by then. Niall thinks Sanders social-democratic ideology would cripple the American economy, but would it be more harmful than Bush's Iraq war at $1 trillion which Ferguson admits he tangentially supported despite his claim of immunity from Group Think.
Talking with a Scottish historian abt economics (tariffs) is probably not the best idea. I wld recommend a talk with Rana Mitter, Professor of U.S.-Asia Relations at the Harvard Kennedy School on teh subject of tariffs & China.
Australia did have a great run, but only when free trade was happening. As soon as it stopped, the benefits to the population stopped, but it had already accumulated in wealthy Australia when it stopped.
Of what possible relevance is the number of troops that Hitler used to invade Poland? I thought this analogy was ludicrous the first time I heard it from Mearsheimer's mouth and it hasn't become any more convincing in the interim. The simple answer to the question of why Putin only used 190,000 troops for the initial invasion is that's all he thought he needed to end Ukraine's sovereignty. He assumed that half or more of the population would welcome the Russians with open arms and most of the rest wouldn't contest the issue. The invaders in the Kiev region were instructed to bring their parade uniforms with them for the anticipated triumphal march down Khreshchatyk Street! Ignorance and hubris unbounded...
He can talk about Russia violating Ukraine's sovereignty, and Iraq violating Kuwait's sovereignty, and just not mention all the "rules based order defenders" invasions of country after country. Laughable that the interviewer didn't call him out on this. "no forcible changes in national sovereignty permitted and there wasn't in Europe any attempt of this sort until Putin's invasion of Ukraine" - oh that's funny, so NATO didn't invade Serbia then carve up Kosovo? And Putin never said Ukraine had no legitimacy to be an independent state, Ferguson is a liar and propagandist. That's why he'd never take on someone like Mearsheimer.
It is incredible to hear from the guest that most intellectuals and political leaders in the West did not think that Iran would be the principal beneficiary of the Iraqi war. Very strange! Almost any child in 4th grade in Near East or South Asia could educate these so-called leaders and thinkers that Shia sect of Islam binds Iraq and Iran as two people with one heart.
true is talking about imperial invasions, he never lists up the invasions the usa did in the time after ww2 untill now. Then its ok, can you imagine China doing pre emtptive invasions like the usa is doing. He also seems to forget that invading a souvereign country is according to international law the act of agression. For this act the nazi s and the japanese war criminals where put to death for this. Also it was never the intention of Russia to conquer Ukrain with only 100k soldiers. He serously wrong about this, if you want in my opinion a better look on this prof mearsheimer is a better bet. Not that is its right to invade of course. On trade he is also greatly mistaken, it was all about the bottem line during the '90 the ceo s of the big firms moved to China to increase their proffit margians by a factor of 10. A friend of mine finished moving the last of the big factories in the usa to China, back in the day he told me about this. They see everything trough a way to western lens. the rest of the world is not seeing it like this at all, if they do not change this way of seeing things they are going to be chocked in what is comming.
Trump threatens 25% Tariffs to annex Canada using "Economic Force". Trump signed the USMCA in 2020 and now he's tearing it up. His word is worthless. Trump imposed 16.6 Billion in Tariffs on Canada in 2018. At 25% across the board for 4 years it will be 440 Billion this time. Tha'ts 26 times as much.
Niall Ferguson has an ego the size of the Atlantic Ocean. Regarding Ukraine/Russia, the best historians to pay attention are Anne Applebaum and Tim Snyder. They are much more believable.
@@marcionbruno8197The other two definitely agreed that the war would never end until Putin saw no way forward. Thus, there was no possibility that the war would end in the fall of 2022 as Ferguson suggested.
Trump threatens 25% Tariffs to annex Canada using "Economic Force". Trump signed the USMCA in 2020 and now he's tearing it up. His word is worthless. Trump imposed 16.6 Billion in Tariffs on Canada in 2018. At 25% across the board for 4 years it will be 440 Billion this time. Tha'ts 26 times as much.
The Irak war and "questionable group thinking": #Ferguson forgets to mention the nations (mostly all European countries) which said no to the Irak war. Ferguson by now bends aruments like it fits (his arguments).
This guy supported violating Iraqs borders with the only quam that the USA wasn't prepared enough. Yet big international law spokesmen on Ukraine. Clearly a biased "intellectual".
@matthiasniklaus392 i heard that sentence. I was reffering to how he talked about the 2003 invasion into Iraq proper. Just seems he's rules based order only applies when it's not Western countries violating it.
@@user-ju1qd3ok2g the soviets and Americans tried to occupy Afghanistan, both with more or less disastrous outcomes. Russia helped the Persians in Iraq in the early 18th century. Iraq after 2003 has become a hotbed of radical jihadism and Christian persecution as Aleppo is now. Bashar and saddam aren't good but better than the alternative. As for Ukraine. It's been a civil/ proxy war long before 2022. So what's your point?
@@josephcasey6672 Nothing of what you write is relevant. What is relevant is that borders are permanent and will never change. This is the foundation of peace
Why could the Ukraina fight back the russians? Because America delivered enormes amount of wapon between september and desember in 2021...and the russians saw that.
The Afghan government the Vietnamese Government etc received American weapons.. didn't help. Proves you are ignorant. The Ukrainian People and Leadership were willing to fight and sacrifice their lives for what they truly believe in... stopping Putin and Russia and joining all the other European nations in Democracy and Free Trade ( the EU) and Peace, living HAPPILY in a world without Russian controle.
16:33. Why did the cast of characters in official charge in 2001 think what they thought about China and the WTO? Niall was in the Boston area at the time and should know the answer. The answer lived in Boston. Niall really needs to look at more LiveCam videos of the Boston skyline in January early morning to grasp the basic point. New York is equally revealing, if one knows the basics about what the narrative and decision makers are missing.
Stop throwing softball questions. US has invaded a lot of countries since 1945. Panama, Granada, Iraq, so on and so forth. That is not the issue. The problem is countries changing their established borders through war. Then there are disputed borders, let's leave that issue to the side. Also leaving aside border wars of the colonial sort. There are not many instances. I can only think of NATO invasion of Serbia to break of Kosovo.
There is no need to take the time machine to go back to the 30s. Not only the direct invasions you mentioned, but also the support of terrorists and dictators that kills millions. Double standard and selective amnesia.
Us did its best to be police man,,,,Now you,lll see without the US ,exploitation by Russia and China who is going to correct that ???????????????????? perlexed Uk here
Moronic comment. America invaded but did not annex or stop those countries existing. Very different from what china did to Tibet or is trying to do to Taiwan. You are just ignorant or in bad faith
Nial Ferguson has demonstrated a childish view. Ferguson is no doubt aware of the effort that was made to oust the previous pro Russian President of Ukraine. The Candy Man who replaced the previous Presisent did not sponsor this event. But here is Ferguson, subscribing to group thinking, supporting a nations right to be sovereign, and surprised how Russia reacted...
Ferguson claims he correctly predicted everything the interviewer asks about history. If he’s so good why doesn’t he write about the future and not history. Opinionated with a big ego.
The whole concept of NATO expansion is something pre-1930s. NATO and Ukraine were doing the pre-1930s thing in the first place, which was considered unacceptable by the Russians with their pre-1930s mindset, and who then commenced the invasion in a pre-1930s style, and then NATO was SURPRISED...
BS! Why the f’ck would we cut the corrupt and despotic Putin regime any slack. They invaded Ukraine and clearly Ukraine doesn’t want them there. It’s no more complicated than that.
Niall Ferguson is really an Economics Historian...a great writer and thinker...but that doesn't make him perfect either. I've read eight of his books, all of them well written. All Historians are "Monday morning Quarter backs", Niall Ferguson is one of the better Historians...perfect? No...but better than most.
The question was: was Putin's invasion "unprovoke"? He answered "he violated international law". That's not an answer. Also, wasn't the US/UK invasion of Sadam's Iraq exactly the same violation of international law as Putin's with Ukraine?
The host misunderstands the point of tariffs against China. It’s not a protectionist measure for U.S. industry, at least in most fields. The tariffs are meant to harm China’s economy as punishment for the CCP’s actions, and as leverage in getting China to do things like stop supporting industrial espionage, stop threatening U.S. citizens from China, stop shipping huge amounts of fentanyl precursors to the cartels, stop using its fishing fleet for piracy, stop cyber attacks, etc., and reduce China’s ability to build up its military by depriving it of funding. Yes, the U.S. might suffer a bit of economic harm too, but not nearly as much as China will.
A (big) side issue is that it would provide the US government with a large amount of sorely needed fresh money basically an underhanded consumption tax
The only thing I liked about Niall Ferguson was his doco the Accent of money back in 2009. Other than that don’t agree with a lot particularly around China
Inflation during Biden was a combo of many things including keeping the China tariffs began under Trump. However the greatest contributor was the effects from the pandemic: exceptional and significant domestic productivity impacts due to workforce and supply chain challenges. Workers left jobs in droves. Worker and supply shortages drove up prices. Interest rates also spiked for a while so corporate borrowing costs rose, which drove up costs of production. And, yes, the printing of $USD for pandemic relief payouts certainly would lower value of USD currency and increase price of imported goods, however the same was happening in major trading partners' countries (maybe except China) such as Canada, so to some extent that FX effect would be cancelled. Another cause was greedflation, where some sectors/products with a near monopolistic like presence raised prices excessively and reaped record profits as a result. Another big factor is world energy commodity prices have remained high due to the wars, which impacts US consumers because domestic producers kept prices high in line with world prices. As well, any energy-intensive products made overseas, especially from Europe, imported to US would've risen substantially (eg. Germany had huge hydrocarbon based energy costs increase since 2022.02). Also directly related to the wars is the cost of shipping has spiked significantly, in part due to a huge increase in maritime insurance rates (and maritime insurers are reaping massive profits as they've rarely had to pay out).
USA suffered lower inflation than most other European countries. Undoubtedly the Biden financial stimulus was a factor in the inflation, but without the stimulus, there would have never higher unemployment.
I'm happy everyone has caught up with Naill Ferguson's Schtick. When revisionist history of Niall Ferguson got stumped by revisionist history of Daryll Cooper, it completely rattled him. 😂
The interviewer was somewhat aggressive and did not listen to any of the answers provided. Subsequent questions were just repeats of prior questions previously rebuffed
whats going on with their clothes? looks like they’re dressed to host a kids show in the 1980s. all thats missing is a big puppet in the middle making weird innuendo jokes - actually thats their political arguments 😂😂🎉
Thankyou Professor Neil Ferguson for all your important insights and helping clarify the important facts, and issues, in a really fair and informative way terrific
Niall, you keep referring to tariffs on Chinese products as being justified and good, as though they are the only tariffs he has, and will be imposing. Just look at his threats to Mexico and Canada. Moreover, how can you justify his national annexation threats?
He did not invade in 2014 you utter liars. "in Crimea, yep" - lol, the Crimean parliament voted to join Russia, the Russian military already based there took control, and the Ukrainian army units deserted and went over to the Russians. You're basically accusing the Crimenas of invading themselves.
2+2 = 4 is a fact. That we all agree with it is not "group think". Likewise it is a fact that Russia invaded Ukraine without being militarily provoked - that's a fact, not "group think". The "vote to join Russia" happened after Russia invaded Crimea - in much the same way as it did in the occupied Donbas. The vote being taken under Russian military control. Not fair and transparent. When you say Ukrainian army deserted - Ukraine at the time had a small army and were almost entirely dependent on Russia and the West honouring their commitments to respect Ukrainian sovereignty. Ukraine trusted Russia - thus Russia could just walk in and take Crimea. An error of judgement they didn't make in 2022. All your comment proves is that you can't trust Russia or the West to honour on paper peace agreements. Only might.
I wonder what the native people of Crimea, the Crimean Tartars, would say about your comment. The Soviets exiled most of them to Siberia. Some returned to Crimea during Gorbachev's time. Crimea historically was not Russian. It was ruled by the Turks for centuries.
Every time Tom sits with a knowledgeable guest, he shows how much he's ignorant about international politics. As Naill retorts, Tom has only read a couple of Miershimer's pieces.
Despite Ferguson’s “I told you so” about American foreign policy he still chose to become an American citizen and now lives a nice comfortable life in sunny California rather than stay in soggy Scotland.
Didn't you... No. Ah, but didn't you... No. Yes but I seem to remember that you... No. Did Tom Switzer do no research of Niall Ferguson's positions before this interview?
I think that he doesn't quite understand what ''free trade'' actually mean when he was speaking about China. When the free trade is in use, the most advanced country is using all the benefits because of it's comparative advantage. So, when the U.S. have international trade system going to their advantage everything was all right. But now, China is somehow the bad guy. As the most famous meme says ''Sure, Jan''. Since the 2014. I didn't hear Sine ira et studio analysis from this historian for the contemporary politics but only one sided approach. Kudos for the Kissinger book though.
What should Trump do about Russia and China?
Trump can't even handle the United States.
@@David_Lloyd-Jones
Lol. He’s won two elections. He handles the US in his sleep
Buy them coffee.
@@David_Lloyd-Joneswait, he isn’t even president yet and he got rid of Trudeau, did a cease fire in Palestine, is getting the hostages released, the fda after yrs is now removing red dye from food, has slowed illegal immigration and will soon end the Ukrainian Russian war. You are clueless!
@@richardvivian3665 he handles its moronic population. The rest of the World is far smarter
When the host introduced him as "intellectually independent" in the first 15sec, I choked on my coffee.
somebody should give him a CIA-paid me to be here shirt
@@bobobobic9330 🎯👌😂
Niall Ferguson is one of those people who convince me that Dietrisch Bonhoeffer knew what he was talking about when he concluded that stupidity is linked to moral issues (For example, those who think that Free Speech is a right to believe in lies) rather than linked to intellegence.
I farted in my pant :(
@@elbacr9501 Niall is just another one of those political commentators who try to appear to be objective but anything that may diminish his speaker opportunities, almost entirely in the Western media, he intentionally presents only 1-sided dimension to align with the political discourse of the day.
Ferguson gets called out on always supporting the worst decisions of the U.S. government, and then rather than owning up to his mistakes, he'll reference how he said something different in other writings.
To be fair if you read Colossus, he does not think the Iraq invasion would be a success because he believed America is inherently uncomfortable with imperialism.
It would fail for 3 reasons in his estimation
1) American doesn’t have the manpower of people who want to spent decades in places with Iraq to establish deep relations and help then set up strong institutions
2) the media attention in the US is so lacking that he doesn’t properly inform its citizens on the importance of things like Iraq War and the need to have a long term presence
3) the nature of Amercian democracy, means that bi-annual election prompts politicians to set short term leaving dates on interventions (with a ‘quick fix’ mindset) when in reality a longer term presence is needed.
4) lack of fiscal power, due to high welfare and debt
@@michaelmccomb2594 All good points. But then it was pointed out in this interview that he supported the Iraq invasion. Apparently, these objections weren't strong enough for him to not support it.
He is an academic. On the one hand this, on the other hand that. Can debate both sides, with plenty of pros and cons each way. Never wrong.
@@alvinseah5423 But he still seems to throw his support publicly behind some of the U.S.‘s worst decisions. Seems to be a "two-faced" public intellectual - supporting crazy and brutal U.S. invasions, but then later pointing to his work questioning them.
@@jasonjean2901 yes he supported it, but he had a hugely different vision for how it should be done.
He seems more a narcissist than an intellectual or a scholar
One of the best exchanges I have listened in to this decade
Every time I see this Brit anywhere, he talks only about the US, as if he's on their payroll or something.
Yes he’s a Cécile Rhodes society member. He doesn’t support the US precisely. He supports the Anglo Saxon empire and he’s probably the best at it.
Remind me bidens $1.6 billion anti China propaganda budget.
@@Pause_café_Avec_Dr_Djon He's a US citizen and lives in the USA. Next.
He was answering the questions that were asked.
he is an american
Have we really benefited (in Australia) from globalisation and free trade liberalism? We have practically zero manufacturing, huge market concentration in all areas of the economy, and we're probably the MOST expensive country in the world when it comes to cost of living. What Niall said at the 21st minute, similarities apply here. And the major parties wonder why their primary vote is getting lower all the time.
Australia relies on selling commodities and trade with the rest of the world has made Australia rich. It is naive to think you haven't benefitted from globalistion or from free trade liberalism.
Opportunitistic Snake oil salesman
glad people are finally discovering what a flip-flopping joker this Niall Ferguson guy is. pretty pathetic human being. Glad the neo-con view is losing steam in the US. Hopefully he can be contained to England.
I love the hole in Niall's shoe.
In 2015, Trump was not the sole political voice talking about the harm globalization had done to middle America - Bernie Sanders was talking about that for at least six years by then. Niall thinks Sanders social-democratic ideology would cripple the American economy, but would it be more harmful than Bush's Iraq war at $1 trillion which Ferguson admits he tangentially supported despite his claim of immunity from Group Think.
Mr. group think himself. Even now he still believe Russia would lose or is losing.
And more double standard views on China.
Talking with a Scottish historian abt economics (tariffs) is probably not the best idea. I wld recommend a talk with Rana Mitter, Professor of U.S.-Asia Relations at the Harvard Kennedy School on teh subject of tariffs & China.
It was almost delicious to see Prof Ferguson explain geopolitics to Switzer and us. A tour de force indeed.
I'm falling asleep...
This idiot was brought down in a debate si he prefers isolated interviewes in which he will not be questioned.
In what debate?
Australia did have a great run, but only when free trade was happening. As soon as it stopped, the benefits to the population stopped, but it had already accumulated in wealthy Australia when it stopped.
Don’t waste time on his biased views. Snake charmer well done.
Of what possible relevance is the number of troops that Hitler used to invade Poland? I thought this analogy was ludicrous the first time I heard it from Mearsheimer's mouth and it hasn't become any more convincing in the interim. The simple answer to the question of why Putin only used 190,000 troops for the initial invasion is that's all he thought he needed to end Ukraine's sovereignty. He assumed that half or more of the population would welcome the Russians with open arms and most of the rest wouldn't contest the issue. The invaders in the Kiev region were instructed to bring their parade uniforms with them for the anticipated triumphal march down Khreshchatyk Street! Ignorance and hubris unbounded...
Who isn’t the free trade country? 2008 USA government give enormous money to bailout many big companies, it was much more than Chinese subsidy.
He can talk about Russia violating Ukraine's sovereignty, and Iraq violating Kuwait's sovereignty, and just not mention all the "rules based order defenders" invasions of country after country. Laughable that the interviewer didn't call him out on this. "no forcible changes in national sovereignty permitted and there wasn't in Europe any attempt of this sort until Putin's invasion of Ukraine" - oh that's funny, so NATO didn't invade Serbia then carve up Kosovo?
And Putin never said Ukraine had no legitimacy to be an independent state, Ferguson is a liar and propagandist. That's why he'd never take on someone like Mearsheimer.
Dwarf standing next to John M
@@soonpohtay4794 and Jeffrey Sach
He never mention Victoria Newland's role and the USA 's regime change policies and NATO expansion or Russian security!
Ukraine is not part of NATO, that is why Putin invaded.
Wrong. Putin has repeatedly said Ukraine has no legitimacy to be a sovreign state. I've watched him say it. Look it up.
“And if China’s not playing by the rules, it’s crazy to play by the rules yourself.” Epic quote.
It is incredible to hear from the guest that most intellectuals and political leaders in the West did not think that Iran would be the principal beneficiary of the Iraqi war. Very strange! Almost any child in 4th grade in Near East or South Asia could educate these so-called leaders and thinkers that Shia sect of Islam binds Iraq and Iran as two people with one heart.
US intellectuals knew this as well, but saying so doesn't put money in Ferguson's pocket.
"It's against international law" . So is taking Greenland and Panama Canal by force.
" Sanctions and toppling of government of every countries "
Nobody has taken neither Greenland nor Panama Canal so far. What did I miss?
Trump is offering to buy it dimwit!
Intellectual? Self righteousness.
true is talking about imperial invasions, he never lists up the invasions the usa did in the time after ww2 untill now. Then its ok, can you imagine China doing pre emtptive invasions like the usa is doing.
He also seems to forget that invading a souvereign country is according to international law the act of agression. For this act the nazi s and the japanese war criminals where put to death for this.
Also it was never the intention of Russia to conquer Ukrain with only 100k soldiers. He serously wrong about this, if you want in my opinion a better look on this prof mearsheimer is a better bet. Not that is its right to invade of course.
On trade he is also greatly mistaken, it was all about the bottem line during the '90 the ceo s of the big firms moved to China to increase their proffit margians by a factor of 10. A friend of mine finished moving the last of the big factories in the usa to China, back in the day he told me about this. They see everything trough a way to western lens. the rest of the world is not seeing it like this at all, if they do not change this way of seeing things they are going to be chocked in what is comming.
I’ve read several of Niall’s books. He is brilliant.
Tariffs against Canada will provoke a trade war, which is not to America's advantage. Did you forget that, Niall?
Trump threatens 25% Tariffs to annex Canada using "Economic Force". Trump signed the USMCA in 2020 and now he's tearing it up. His word is worthless. Trump imposed 16.6 Billion in Tariffs on Canada in 2018. At 25% across the board for 4 years it will be 440 Billion this time. Tha'ts 26 times as much.
Great analysis, particularly of China's trade policies and the US failure to deal with China breaking the world trade rules.
Niall Ferguson has an ego the size of the Atlantic Ocean. Regarding Ukraine/Russia, the best historians to pay attention are Anne Applebaum and Tim Snyder. They are much more believable.
They agree with him about almost everything regarding Ukraine, so I'm not sure what your point is
@@marcionbruno8197The other two definitely agreed that the war would never end until Putin saw no way forward. Thus, there was no possibility that the war would end in the fall of 2022 as Ferguson suggested.
Great talk. But the reason household income seems stagnant is because the average size of a household has shrunk.
how about the tariffs on Canada? What rules were broken there?
Trump threatens 25% Tariffs to annex Canada using "Economic Force". Trump signed the USMCA in 2020 and now he's tearing it up. His word is worthless. Trump imposed 16.6 Billion in Tariffs on Canada in 2018. At 25% across the board for 4 years it will be 440 Billion this time. Tha'ts 26 times as much.
You are 100,000.00% WRONG on China !!
China has no future. It has begun an economic and a demographic collapse.
MAGA WORLD and Group Think is a tautology.
John Meashimer is an honest scholar.
Niall is a court historian and a bootlicker for the powerful-truly an embarrassment and a disgrace.
John meashimer is the biggest joke to come out of academia
Mearshimer is a communist like every other U of Chicago attendie.
The Irak war and "questionable group thinking": #Ferguson forgets to mention the nations (mostly all European countries) which said no to the Irak war. Ferguson by now bends aruments like it fits (his arguments).
Lots of grand standing about empire this and that while people at home struggle.
This guy supported violating Iraqs borders with the only quam that the USA wasn't prepared enough. Yet big international law spokesmen on Ukraine. Clearly a biased "intellectual".
Who has changed or tried to change the Afghan or Iraqi borders? You are ignorant and childish and politically blinded.
Listen to the interview one more time: Iraq was invaded after Saddam had assaulted Kuwait. Got it now?
@matthiasniklaus392 i heard that sentence. I was reffering to how he talked about the 2003 invasion into Iraq proper. Just seems he's rules based order only applies when it's not Western countries violating it.
@@user-ju1qd3ok2g the soviets and Americans tried to occupy Afghanistan, both with more or less disastrous outcomes. Russia helped the Persians in Iraq in the early 18th century. Iraq after 2003 has become a hotbed of radical jihadism and Christian persecution as Aleppo is now. Bashar and saddam aren't good but better than the alternative. As for Ukraine. It's been a civil/ proxy war long before 2022. So what's your point?
@@josephcasey6672
Nothing of what you write is relevant. What is relevant is that borders are permanent and will never change. This is the foundation of peace
Why could the Ukraina fight back the russians? Because America delivered enormes amount of wapon between september and desember in 2021...and the russians saw that.
The Afghan government the Vietnamese Government etc received American weapons.. didn't help. Proves you are ignorant.
The Ukrainian People and Leadership were willing to fight and sacrifice their lives for what they truly believe in... stopping Putin and Russia and joining all the other European nations in Democracy and Free Trade ( the EU) and Peace, living HAPPILY in a world without Russian controle.
I'm sorry. But Ms Ferguson forgot Kososvo....forexempel..
A lot of sloppy thinking going on here!
But not in the interview but in the comments!
@matthiasniklaus392 😆 there too!
Niall Ferguson still couldn't answer whether the attack was "unprovoked".
Self inflated windbag.
16:33. Why did the cast of characters in official charge in 2001 think what they thought about China and the WTO? Niall was in the Boston area at the time and should know the answer. The answer lived in Boston. Niall really needs to look at more LiveCam videos of the Boston skyline in January early morning to grasp the basic point. New York is equally revealing, if one knows the basics about what the narrative and decision makers are missing.
1:10 I agree. If everyone is agreeing with everyone else, someone must be wrong.
Stop throwing softball questions. US has invaded a lot of countries since 1945. Panama, Granada, Iraq, so on and so forth. That is not the issue. The problem is countries changing their established borders through war. Then there are disputed borders, let's leave that issue to the side. Also leaving aside border wars of the colonial sort.
There are not many instances. I can only think of NATO invasion of Serbia to break of Kosovo.
There is no need to take the time machine to go back to the 30s.
Not only the direct invasions you mentioned, but also the support of terrorists and dictators that kills millions.
Double standard and selective amnesia.
Us did its best to be police man,,,,Now you,lll see without the US ,exploitation by Russia and China who is going to correct that ???????????????????? perlexed Uk here
Moronic comment. America invaded but did not annex or stop those countries existing. Very different from what china did to Tibet or is trying to do to Taiwan.
You are just ignorant or in bad faith
Not NATO invasion in Europe. NATo is Europe. European countries forcing the USA to help them stop Serbians killing other Ex-Yugoslavian Populations .
@@Cuzthatwouldbeweird I think that is what he is saying
None of us one in the rest of the world can understand, why does America hates the world that they live in.
Nial Ferguson has demonstrated a childish view. Ferguson is no doubt aware of the effort that was made to oust the previous pro Russian President of Ukraine. The Candy Man who replaced the previous Presisent did not sponsor this event. But here is Ferguson, subscribing to group thinking, supporting a nations right to be sovereign, and surprised how Russia reacted...
There was a popular uprising.
Took me many years to think less.
Love the speed.
Ferguson loves his own voice
Ferguson claims he correctly predicted everything the interviewer asks about history. If he’s so good why doesn’t he write about the future and not history. Opinionated with a big ego.
Rather narrowed perspective and shallowed insights comparing to Kishore Mahbubani and George Yeo
I'll say that enjoyed his work on WWI history. Otherwise...meh
I'm glad to have seen this. Now I know not to waste my time on a such lightweight "public intellectual". Basically worthless.
The whole concept of NATO expansion is something pre-1930s. NATO and Ukraine were doing the pre-1930s thing in the first place, which was considered unacceptable by the Russians with their pre-1930s mindset, and who then commenced the invasion in a pre-1930s style, and then NATO was SURPRISED...
BS! Why the f’ck would we cut the corrupt and despotic Putin regime any slack.
They invaded Ukraine and clearly Ukraine doesn’t want them there. It’s no more complicated than that.
Pathetic 19th-centiry "Great Power Spheres of Influence". Too much Mearsheimer rubbish absolutely
I find Mearsheimer quite knowledgeable and compelling, but do you have a better offer? I’m always willing to listen to other viewpoints
Niall Ferguson is really an Economics Historian...a great writer and thinker...but that doesn't make him perfect either. I've read eight of his books, all of them well written. All Historians are "Monday morning Quarter backs", Niall Ferguson is one of the better Historians...perfect? No...but better than most.
Historian of convenience, cheer leader for Biden's narrative, and not a word about the truth behind the scene.
Tom rocks as much as Ferguson sucks.
The question was: was Putin's invasion "unprovoke"? He answered "he violated international law". That's not an answer. Also, wasn't the US/UK invasion of Sadam's Iraq exactly the same violation of international law as Putin's with Ukraine?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Ferguson defending Putin's actions in Ukraine not long ago?
Group think: the Ma Donald Laurier Institute in Canada is criticizing Canadian Academia for being stacked to the left
The 1930s are calling, Niall. They want their ambitions back.
Well done Niall for pushing back on all the nonsense Russian talking points while keeping his temper
The host misunderstands the point of tariffs against China. It’s not a protectionist measure for U.S. industry, at least in most fields. The tariffs are meant to harm China’s economy as punishment for the CCP’s actions, and as leverage in getting China to do things like stop supporting industrial espionage, stop threatening U.S. citizens from China, stop shipping huge amounts of fentanyl precursors to the cartels, stop using its fishing fleet for piracy, stop cyber attacks, etc., and reduce China’s ability to build up its military by depriving it of funding. Yes, the U.S. might suffer a bit of economic harm too, but not nearly as much as China will.
A (big) side issue is that it would provide the US government with a large amount of sorely needed fresh money
basically an underhanded consumption tax
Naiive. China can play the same game.
The only thing I liked about Niall Ferguson was his doco the Accent of money back in 2009.
Other than that don’t agree with a lot particularly around China
Cis is so imperialist, i am amazed.
British propagandist.
He is Scottish
He fairly anti British in his attitude toward the British government
Boeing: US have no industrial policy :)
Sure, everything you says are right, BECAUSE you are the only one speaking...!
Inflation during Biden was a combo of many things including keeping the China tariffs began under Trump. However the greatest contributor was the effects from the pandemic: exceptional and significant domestic productivity impacts due to workforce and supply chain challenges. Workers left jobs in droves. Worker and supply shortages drove up prices. Interest rates also spiked for a while so corporate borrowing costs rose, which drove up costs of production. And, yes, the printing of $USD for pandemic relief payouts certainly would lower value of USD currency and increase price of imported goods, however the same was happening in major trading partners' countries (maybe except China) such as Canada, so to some extent that FX effect would be cancelled. Another cause was greedflation, where some sectors/products with a near monopolistic like presence raised prices excessively and reaped record profits as a result. Another big factor is world energy commodity prices have remained high due to the wars, which impacts US consumers because domestic producers kept prices high in line with world prices. As well, any energy-intensive products made overseas, especially from Europe, imported to US would've risen substantially (eg. Germany had huge hydrocarbon based energy costs increase since 2022.02). Also directly related to the wars is the cost of shipping has spiked significantly, in part due to a huge increase in maritime insurance rates (and maritime insurers are reaping massive profits as they've rarely had to pay out).
USA suffered lower inflation than most other European countries. Undoubtedly the Biden financial stimulus was a factor in the inflation, but without the stimulus, there would have never higher unemployment.
I'm happy everyone has caught up with Naill Ferguson's Schtick.
When revisionist history of Niall Ferguson got stumped by revisionist history of Daryll Cooper, it completely rattled him. 😂
I used to respect Ferguson
The more I listen to him the more I lose respect.
I will take Mearsheimer any day over Ferguson.
The interviewer was somewhat aggressive and did not listen to any of the answers provided. Subsequent questions were just repeats of prior questions previously rebuffed
whats going on with their clothes? looks like they’re dressed to host a kids show in the 1980s. all thats missing is a big puppet in the middle making weird innuendo jokes - actually thats their political arguments 😂😂🎉
China doesn't do fair trade...and the EU does? How naive 😊
😢Excellent Presenter 🤔💔
What happened to Ferguson's Chimerica and the endless peace ...
Thankyou Professor Neil Ferguson for all your important insights and helping clarify the important facts, and issues, in a really fair and informative way terrific
"I wrote a book on that"....
Niall, you keep referring to tariffs on Chinese products as being justified and good, as though they are the only tariffs he has, and will be imposing. Just look at his threats to Mexico and Canada. Moreover, how can you justify his national annexation threats?
What about Obama’s Asia Pivot?
Every smartphone owner in the American heartland is and was the beneficiary of globalization. Just does not realize it!
No comments?
Terrific vignette from Niall, but hail Tom for direct, honest probing of a rather large (well earnt) ego!
Acton, Namier, Bloch, even Taylor, Trevor-Roper, Stone followed by a media slicker and clever phrase monger? However, often makes sound points.
He did not invade in 2014 you utter liars. "in Crimea, yep" - lol, the Crimean parliament voted to join Russia, the Russian military already based there took control, and the Ukrainian army units deserted and went over to the Russians. You're basically accusing the Crimenas of invading themselves.
Why don't you do an interview so all 0 of us can hear what you think?
2+2 = 4 is a fact. That we all agree with it is not "group think". Likewise it is a fact that Russia invaded Ukraine without being militarily provoked - that's a fact, not "group think".
The "vote to join Russia" happened after Russia invaded Crimea - in much the same way as it did in the occupied Donbas. The vote being taken under Russian military control. Not fair and transparent.
When you say Ukrainian army deserted - Ukraine at the time had a small army and were almost entirely dependent on Russia and the West honouring their commitments to respect Ukrainian sovereignty.
Ukraine trusted Russia - thus Russia could just walk in and take Crimea. An error of judgement they didn't make in 2022.
All your comment proves is that you can't trust Russia or the West to honour on paper peace agreements. Only might.
I wonder what the native people of Crimea, the Crimean Tartars, would say about your comment. The Soviets exiled most of them to Siberia. Some returned to Crimea during Gorbachev's time. Crimea historically was not Russian. It was ruled by the Turks for centuries.
Utter rubbish.
Every time Tom sits with a knowledgeable guest, he shows how much he's ignorant about international politics.
As Naill retorts, Tom has only read a couple of Miershimer's pieces.
This channel is owned by the Russian and these two guys are Russian Agents
independent????of what???Ferguson is always wrong.
this guy likes an each way bet
Despite Ferguson’s “I told you so” about American foreign policy he still chose to become an American citizen and now lives a nice comfortable life in sunny California rather than stay in soggy Scotland.
Didn't you... No. Ah, but didn't you... No. Yes but I seem to remember that you... No. Did Tom Switzer do no research of Niall Ferguson's positions before this interview?
No, Ferguson is being a bit smarmy & gaslighting. His position was very much what the interviewer said it was
I think that he doesn't quite understand what ''free trade'' actually mean when he was speaking about China. When the free trade is in use, the most advanced country is using all the benefits because of it's comparative advantage. So, when the U.S. have international trade system going to their advantage everything was all right. But now, China is somehow the bad guy. As the most famous meme says ''Sure, Jan''. Since the 2014. I didn't hear Sine ira et studio analysis from this historian for the contemporary politics but only one sided approach. Kudos for the Kissinger book though.
Bro you got wrecked by Scott Horton
😢HAWK 🤔🙄💔
they completely forgot Obama's Pivot to the East...
Finding myself agreeing with most of what he said.
that is group thinking ! LOL