John Gray Part II: Welcome to the era of tragic realism

Freddie Sayers meets John Gray in part two of a two-part interview.

Follow UnHerd on social media:

// TIMECODES //

00:00 - 01:09 - Introduction
01:09 - 06:37 - Philosopher John Gray’s take on wider European politics
06:37 - 18:02 - The European Union is a deeply flawed End of History project
18:02 - 24:40 - Has the West made tensions over Ukraine and Taiwan worse?
24:40 - 28:32 - Would Putin use a nuclear weapon?
28:32 - 43:17 - What does the future hold for the Russia-Ukraine conflict?
43:17 - 58:34 - Will America and China go to war over Taiwan?
58:34 - 01:04:43 - What does John Gray’s ‘tragic realism’ mean for the UK and other medium-size countries?
01:04:43 - 01:15:47 - How can you strengthen the state without infringing on people’s freedoms?
01:15:47 - 01:18:15 - Concluding thoughts

#UnHerd #JohnGray #Realism

[catsandcrows]

The Swedish Democrats are not extreme right wing as such, that's an exaggeration. Their policies are a mix, the only area they could be seen to be right wing is their policy concerning immigration. Which isn't exactly a surprise, concerning the current situation in Sweden.

[peterbranagan]

A most frustrating discussion. Gray said he thought that the Ukrainian situation was existential for Russia (a view I share. To avoid any ambiguity, I accept that the Russians believe it's an existential issue. Accordingly Russia cannot lose. It must prevail).

The obvious question to ask then was: is the Ukraine an existential issue for the West?
If it is, then we should all start praying and hope we go in the first wave of thermonuclear strikes.
If it is not, why in God's name are we sending weapons and prolonging the slaughter and the eventual utter destruction of Ukraine?

[OrwellsHousecat]

He says the EU is 'dysfunctional' because the nation state members have diverging views/interests.
However he fails to mention just how frighteningly authoritarian the EU is and how it's becoming more so.
He entirely fails to acknowledge that the authoritarian approach to pushing progressive agendas, could just as easily be used to push other agendas if the right/conservatives took over - but that could only happen if EU got out from under the USA.

[GGTutor]

"From the totalitarian point of view, history is something to be created rather than learned." George Orwell

[pringlel]

The more I listened to this speaker the more my confidence in him waned. When he came out with a patently untrue assertion I had had enough. He said that the Jan 6th 'mob' aimed to kill people. If that was so then, as far as mobs go, they exposed their incompetence by failing to kill a single person. Surely it wouldn't have been difficult. Oh, that's right, they all forgot to take a single gun between them. (By the way, well done Freddie for hardly mentioning the 'far right' or fascists' in this broadcast.)

[chickens]

I'm sure that most people who have followed this discussion from the first part will find plenty of debatable points and question some details of John Gray's analysis, but as a starting point for a wider discussion regarding the future and Britain's place within it, this has been a most useful interview. It would be unreasonable to expect Professor Gray to carry a crystal ball, but he should be commended for having the bravery to put forward his views on where we're headed and enunciating those thoughts in a clear and comprehensible manner. Thanks Unherd.

[fraserbailey]

I am very disappointed with John's description of the Jan 6th. The Capital was not 'stormed'. To a considerable extent, the doors were opened for them. And there was no intent to kill.

[ged]

Part 1 excellent, i think. This episode was like listening to a drunken grandfather at christmas

[gobabawonan]

“Today’s censorship doesn’t come from the government, it comes from civil society” - very profound point

[OrwellsHousecat]

I started noting the lies and inconsistencies in what he was saying but there were literally too many. About 7-12 per minute

[thekid]

The comment section is a nice microcosm of the whole internet: "I really liked the parts where he supported what I already believe, and I really disliked the parts where he didn't support what I already believe. Please never contradict my worldview again."

The internet and social media are just a giant confirmation bias machine. No wonder everyone is getting more and more polarized - it's basically a function of the internet. People naturally tend towards information that supports their pre-existing beliefs. Everyone now wants their personalized, almost neurotic, worldview validated at every moment.

The conversation was interesting. Some of the guest's opinions seemed dubious (to put it nicely), but let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Everyone has dubious opinions about a lot of things, and I include myself here. We take the good and leave the bad, as always.

[Canis_dirus]

I still don’t understand how centre-right populist parties are labeled as fascists. To unironically compare a bunch of milquetoast christians to fascists or national socialist’s is moronic.

[Gioellalili]

He is just same as the rest of western „experts“

[BeMaKi]

Perhaps Prof Jeffrey Sachs can join next time with his clear view on current events. Looking forward to part 3.

[OrwellsHousecat]

I'm kinda dumbfounded. In Part 1 I was glued to the conversation and played it a few times feeling like I found treasure. He was saying things about Britain, brexit, EU and globalisation etc as well as telling us about various factions I'd never heard of.
But in part 2 he's talking utter twaddle and I know this because I've heard a very wide variety of views on the subject.
This makes me reconsider Part 1, .and this channel.

[janebaker]

France and Germany created the EU for really their own purposes and framed the rules to favour their own economies which was very sensible of them. The French in particular wanted to keep all their tiny, inefficient, unprofitable and lovely family farms and the whole lifestyle that goes with it. British farmers were encouraged to adopt the American ideal of ever larger farms, and greater productivity and efficiency. So everyone goes to France, falls in love with the slow pace of life and lifestyle, wants to live there but the days when you could buy an old barn for pennies is gone I think. All the french know their economic system isn't working so they vote for a politician who promises to make changes but when faced with the changes they do what the french have always done, get out there and riot. I think the French have got it right to value their heritage and locale and people.

[andreiaroutiounov]

It always amuses me how very smart people manage to read between the lines. To get into someone’s head and articulate what the other person thinks. It’s ok just to speculate. It becomes way more dangerous when people go to war based on such ‘mind reading’.

[Kavala]

Part 1 I enjoyed. Part 2 revealed Mr. Gray as a standard-issue Russo-phobe.

54:43 "...he [Putin] did say ...a world without the Russian realm is not worth living in"
I have searched for but cannot find this quote. I did however find what Gray may have been referring to:

Putin gave an inteview to Russian television anchor Vladimir Soloviev for his film "World Order - 2018". During this interview Putin was talking about Russia’s nuclear doctrine. He said:

"...After all, our application plans, I hope that this will never happen, but the theoretical application plans are the so-called counter-retaliatory strike. What does it mean? This means that the decision to use nuclear weapons can only be made if our early warning system not only recorded the launch of missiles, but also gave an accurate forecast, flight trajectory and time of the fall of warheads on the territory of the Russian Federation. This is called a counter-retaliatory strike. That is, if someone decides to destroy Russia, then we have a legal right to respond. Yes, for humanity it will be a global catastrophe, for the world there will be a global catastrophe. But still, as a citizen of Russia and the head of the Russian state, then I want to ask myself the question, why do we need such a world where there is no Russia?”

Typically, western media plucked the final part out of context and turned what was a warning into a threat. Until I am shown evidence to the contrary, I believe that Gray not only omits context but also misquotes Putin.

[ozachar]

The cancel culture is quite logical from the perspective of Foucault's power concept. The most effective state control is operated when the people are submitting, not to overt power, but by internalizing conviction, being educated, to do it "for their own good". The Covid event was so clear, that someone like Foucault wouldn't even need deep analysis for it. All the power dynamics was playing out in plain view, but still working like magic.

[paulkillinger]

Mr Grey is without doubt an erudite thinker and philosopher. That said, it makes his Neo-con Russophobia even less comprehensible..