Portal:13: Garry Kasparov - Avoiding Zugzwang in AI and Politics

In this cordially combative episode, Eric sits down with Russian chess legend, multiple-year champion and (inarguably) one of the greatest players of all time, Garry Kasparov. The two discuss transcending AI-induced demotivation, AI brilliancy (and lack thereof), the perilous time for global democracy in Russia, America and globally and Garry's penchant for risking his life for what he believes in. Beyond Chess, Garry is an active political dissident and truth seeker; founding the Russian "United Civil Front" and speaking out against Putin since his retirement from the game in 2005, he's an ardent defender of democracy in Russia and abroad. 1997 was also a watershed year for Garry; it was the year that AI - in the form of IBM's Deep Blue - was able to beat the best chess player in the world (Kasparov). Since then, Garry's been thinking deeply about the role of a newly positioned mankind in the world of a rising AI. From tech displacement to political unrest, please enjoy this wide ranging episode covering some of the most crucial issues of our time.



Sponsors
ExpressVPN: Visit expressvpn.com/PORTAL you can get an extra three months of ExpressVPN for free!

Four Sigmatic: Visit foursigmatic.com/PORTAL to get a 15% discount on all orders

SkillShare: Visit Skillshare.com/PORTAL and get two months free when you sign up

Unedited Transcript
Eric Weinstein 0:07 [Introduction in Russian]

Garry Kasparov 0:32 Thank you very much. So Garry Kasparov, just very good. Let's make sure so so my name was changed, nodded 75 because my father died tragically when I was seven. So it just it's, he was just 39 and it was just leukemia and they couldn't save him and I grew up with my mother and her parents and in 1975 so there was a family decision. You know, I, I could change my name and to carry my name, name of my my mother, my grandpa, my great grandfather. So that's, that's that's a story so since 1975 I'm known for the world of chess as Garry

Eric Weinstein 1:15 Kasparov. I know that you're Garry Kasparov. In fact, there are very few people who need no introduction. You are one of them. And I was tempted to give you almost no interest.

Garry Kasparov 1:24 Yeah. Awesome, perfect Russian. So that's

Eric Weinstein 1:27 very kind. Yes. Gary, you're known for many things. We could talk about your dominance of the world of chess is world number one for many years, famous from top level play. Sort of a streak of dominance, like we've never seen. But if anything, it's been really remarkable to watch your career after chess where you've taken on this incredible role in a very confusing age as a champion of human rights and I'm not sure really Which of the topics I want to hit most, whether it's talking about automation and your famous interaction with deep blue, but I think that the thing I want to do is I want to try to avoid some of the questions you get asked over and over again, like, who is the greatest chess player of all time? Thank you.

Garry Kasparov 2:17 Yeah, very grateful.

Eric Weinstein 2:19 So let's try to figure out what that might have crowded out. And let's, let's move on to the next sorts of things. So to begin with, one of the things that I'd like to talk to you about is something that I'm very confused by when you played Deep Blue back in the late 1990s. And the world 96 and 97. Right, be precise, right mid mid to late 90s. The world watched in a way that it probably hadn't watched a chess match since Fisher versus Spassky. Is that a fair statement?

Garry Kasparov 2:54 Yes, it's a first statement. I think that as was the most visible chess invented history. Right? Because it was not just just event it's it was the pinnacle of this human versus machine competition that was so fascinating for general public for decades. This match was and still surrounded by a very sick form of mythology. And yet what what to expect it was a machine and it says people think oh, it was unique accomplishment because it's the.it was a dawn of AI. Look, Deep Blue was not intelligent at all. Its was not more intelligent than your alarm clock, a very expensive 110 million dollars apiece, but, but the truth is that the machine that played chess in 1997 did not have to be intelligent at all. Because at the end of the day, it's not about being intelligent. It's not about replicating This human process, you know, just it's to follow you the way we make our decisions, but it's about making fewer mistakes. And that's it. That's something that is so it is actually the most relevant lesson of 1997 match, and also remind people I won in 1996. Right, and IBM then chickened out, they didn't want to play the shirt match, because probably at that time, I was still the strongest person yet now, but it's good business decision, as I explained in my book, deep thinking it was a good business decision, because they, they knew that in 1997, Deep Blue was a very powerful force, but compared to you know, just due to machines today, it was just you know, it was just a novice. I mean, it says today, do you understand what's happened over the last 20 years? Yes, it's the it's the blue 1997 was the unique project of IBM was millions of millions of dollars invested in one of the largest corporations on this planet. Today, you can by a chess engine online and download on your laptop and this computer, this chess device right will be much stronger than Magnus Carlsen the current world chess champion, right. So and if you have specialized hardware for the same, you know, engines like stockfish, Houdini, Komodo, Komodo, Komodo, the difference in strength between these devices, right specialized hardware, and Magnus Carlsen, right, it's about the same as between Usain Bolt and Ferrari. And so deeply 1997 was not that good. So with this,

Eric Weinstein 5:43 what do we know if we, if we took that exact software? And you guys keep track of in some sense how good something is by these ELO ratings? Yes. So what would its Elo rating today be relative to the topic, I think we can just add.

Garry Kasparov 5:57 Yeah, I thank you very much for just bringing this in. numbers because audio always likes numbers. So my highest rating might be grading 1.8 5128 2851. Now Bob officials highest rating was 2785. But in 1972, so you always have to remember that, you know, it's the inflation was and still is a,

Eric Weinstein 6:17 it's a relative system has nothing to do with chess itself.

Garry Kasparov 6:21 No, no, I just basically do you know, you you perform well you add points you don't perform well,

Eric Weinstein 6:26 you lose points. And the point value predicts how likely you are to beat so

Garry Kasparov 6:31 even if we play against each other, we have the same rating. So that's why you know, and I do, let's say, I beat you six to four. So that means I add 10 points. So take away a little 10 points if we're this. Now, if you know, if the gap between those 200 points, right, I think it's 230 points, it's I should score at 80%. I think that's just from the top of my memory God. So it's predictions based on the difference in our in our rating, right and then so I do Better than predicted. So add points was a lose points. So go back to this to my absolute before absolute record was 208 to 2851. Fisher was 2785. But remember that when Fisher reached these these phenomenal height right? There will no place in 2700 ran there were very few places 2600. So it was a huge gap. So this is 2785 in 1972 probably was over 2900 today, so they'll probably might 2051 in 1999 as well. Magnus Carlsen highest rating was 2882. Now he's about 2840. So he's still you know, traversing this 2800 category, right there are only a few players actually crossed 2800 these days and they're at the range of 2028 1020 20. So, so and it's when I played the blue, so I was 2100 plus the bulls objective strength was probably 2700 Plus, but it's not about objective strength. It's about how you play play in this very game and how many mistakes you make. Now, today the if you have these chess engines on the specialized hardware, right, that we probably showed you 400 It's amazing. 400 is amazing. Yeah, it's this. It's again, it's not because

Eric Weinstein 8:16 but I want to ask this different question, which is, if we took the exact machine and the software and we took it out of mothballs from 1997 what do we think its Elo rating would be today? The blue Yes, the old the blue like only

Garry Kasparov 8:33 bless it. It's this 20 maybe 2800 but not more,

Eric Weinstein 8:38 because it's so Magnus Carlsen would be expected the reason I asked if

Garry Kasparov 8:42 it will be competition. I mean, this is the blue again, I could have been the blue if it were the shirt match. Yes, I will be a favorite because I really learned a lot about

Eric Weinstein 8:49 this thing is that I thought was so inspiring that you talked about how we learn from these computers that the humans are getting smarter about

Garry Kasparov 8:58 its machines. make huge progress or since these machines today, they are so much I, I'm not sure I can say smarter. But is this more advanced right? And because Don't forget the blue was it was not just a chess project, it was a project of parallel processors. So they had 256 processors, each of them was a mini computer that could make 1.5 million positions per second. So combined, they could reach phenomenal speeds of 200 million positions per second 200 million, which again, today it's not it's not it's not. It's not that impressive. But these are the these chess devices which we just discussed on your laptop, they will not be faster than five, 6 million positions per second. So they're not as fast but they are far more advanced because they don't have to be that fast. It's not about calculating, calculating, because chess is some people don't recognize just as mathematically infinite or almost infinite game functionally infinite. Functionally infinite. According to Claude Shannon, you know, one of the foundations Are those with computer science? The number of legal moves in the game of 40? Something and 246 power? Okay. 1046 power. That's again, that's that's it's just this number is just as it's kills imagination, right? Exactly. Yeah. So it's not about calculating only but it's also about coding, what understanding and the programs today, they are so much that all right, but there's no, there's no, there's no questions, you cannot even touch them. So just because even the strongest players, you know, they will, they will be badly beaten. Now, if you ever free chess app on your mobile phone, yes, that's probably as good as the blu ray thanks to the Moore's law,

Eric Weinstein 10:39 which is very impressive. But what I really want to get at is the reason that chess matters to us and the reason that we all thrilled to it has to do with its legacy, the way it's interwoven with our society, our culture, our storytelling, even our language. We are constantly searching for chess metaphor. And one of the things that animates us is the poetry of chess that when, when fathers and sons, for example, would pull out, you know, games of Morphe or something, and to try to show something really graceful and beautiful. We would look to the Evergreen game or the immortal game or something like that, and it lifts our spirits. And sometimes we were really focused not on who won or who lost. But on the concept of resiliency is when does somebody do something so unexpected and so daring, that they put themselves at great risk and then manage to somehow extricate themselves? What I want to know is, are we in a position to program computers for brilliancy and poetry's rather than simply brute force?

Garry Kasparov 11:42 Okay, let's start with your assumptions. You

Eric Weinstein 11:46 can unweave them if not

Garry Kasparov 11:47 assumption now, that's an assertion of an earlier concept of us. Because you said you times us Okay, yeah, it's the now the era of globalization, we should recognize that you know, us you know, look different in different quarters the game of chess that you mentioned it's the it's not the only game of chess that does exist sure

Eric Weinstein 12:09 so and one that came from like India through Persia

Garry Kasparov 12:11 it's a one of one of the versions right whether it's India again we don't have any records about India we definitely have few records about the game played emerging. It it's the records come actually from the Arab world. Okay, so what we know about European chess let me call European chess is that the game traveled from you know, from the Arab world to Iberian Peninsula and the first book that that

presented the completion of chess studies

played by you know, in old Ouroboros sutra and you know, much slower game because the game of just always reflected some sort of it's it's a military knowledge of its time right was it and it was king, allegedly written by King Alfonso, the wire It's originals captain, this is coral in in in Spain in 20 1283. And and then, you know, the the current version of chess has been shaped by the end of the 15th sixth century six, early 16th century in Spain, with a few extra additions in Italy and in France in the next couple of hundred years. That's European chess, that's international chess got it. But there is also Chinese gesture. There is Thai chess, and some variation of touches. That is, by the way, the closes to original Arab version shatranj. So this is very slow game game and is a totally separate game called shogi. Japanese chess, by far the most popular game in Japan, far more popular than golf. Okay, so and the way it is Japanese jazz is being played is probably reflects the way you know the military operations have been conducted over centuries. They're one of the key elements there that is, you always can bring a piece that you took from your opponent back was a parachute move. Oh, and most of the pieces they just Fast So does it and straight so there's this it's it's it's it's it's the game doesn't doesn't have an end game the way we have it in chess it's all about attacking the kingpins it's, it's like a slow motion game but then it's the moment it's the it's the both sides they the, they like the meet each other but that'll feel it's like a samurai Samurai you know, just it's bloodshed. Okay, there's

Eric Weinstein 14:24 like a metaphoric aspect of which kind of chess Exactly,

Garry Kasparov 14:26 exactly. No, but it's this but you said exactly in the in the Western European, right? Eurocentric world, right? chess as been viewed for centuries as the as, as like a nexus of of human intelligence. So this is this. It's, it's saying, oh, he or she played chess. Wow, what is it? It's It's It's because it was like a mystery. It's not surprising that Alfred binaire, the father of IQ test, right. So at the end of the 19th century, he was fascinated by the way the chest Mind was working. So he believed that if he could study the minds of the chess player two brains on the chess players, he could reveal the golden secrets of human intelligence. It's very interesting. By the way, it's not true. It says it's very flattering to me to say that but yeah, that's that's the great greatest minds. always looked at chess as sort of you always

Eric Weinstein 15:21 test Have you always been a self critical as you're being right now.

Garry Kasparov 15:24 so critical. I'm objective is the the aptitude. aptitude for playing chess is nothing else an aptitude for playing chess, you can, it's like, you know, your capital, you know, you have intellectual capital, so you can invest wisely, you can invest in poorly.

Eric Weinstein 15:36 Well, I like the idea that even IQ, of course, is not intelligence. It's a particular measure of something. I don't know if you happen to know him, but I went to graduate school in the same year as a guy named Noah alkies. Who, you know, is

Garry Kasparov 15:50 he's the, it's the main he's the Israeli chess composer. Yes, yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. I just because I, I had a book you know, just you know, the It's the stuff of the best Israeli chess studies. Yeah. And and just that's, that's why I recognized.

Eric Weinstein 16:07 Yeah. But he was like the youngest full professor at Harvard.

Garry Kasparov 16:11 Yeah, he's a CT. It's what he was a hobby. But that's the great stuff. But he comments

Eric Weinstein 16:15 on the fact that he can only achieve the level of chess master even though he's a grandmaster in problem solving, and saw and composing. And so there's even there. There's like something very mysterious because this is a sort of like a john von Neumann like level of intelligence. And he's commenting on the fact that he's merely a chess master. And so I found that to be quite shocking and surprising, because I know how some how amazing No, amens

Garry Kasparov 16:42 Look, it gets it's that's, you know,

it's so yeah, but you absolutely valid because it's also about competition. Yeah, you have to you have to compete. I mean, he's he's great minefields, probably more, more at home by composing Rosina is just an easy come comfortably study. You can think about it. So he can Don't get there's no time pressure. There's no opponent just you know across the board you know, no intimidation.

Eric Weinstein 17:06 Exactly. So getting back to brilliancy which I don't want you to avoid

Garry Kasparov 17:09 it no no I'm not gonna avoid it because I know I have a straightforward answer

Eric Weinstein 17:15 you want to say what a brilliancy is in your own language so that you don't

Garry Kasparov 17:18 know it's the before move move to the to to to my definition of brilliancy Sure, yes, I think that's the answer is no straightforward. No machines cannot do it for simple reason. Because you're talking about brilliancy and, and and about creativity. Those are things that you know that's an versus brute force, right the way machines operate. They have been operating ever since and they will be operating for you know indefinite period of time. It's based on odds, they know odds, they know patterns, they can just they can operate within inner within this like an unknown universe and something that they know within the rules that they they either they've decided they have been told about those rules or the information that had been provided for them. But they're always looking for the best move. So brilliancy based on on creativity and it means that yes, I can play a very risky adventurous game maybe it could the brillon game maybe could be failure you have to accept the chance sometimes significant chance of failure to create a masterpiece machines cannot operate in it within this

Eric Weinstein 18:27 pattern how to encode the concept of masterpiece

Garry Kasparov 18:30 Okay, now it's masterpieces it's it's it's something that's you know is it still subjective is a quite it's still subjective because you know some people you know, it's about taste ya know, it's some games you know, people say Wow, it's amazing most likely these games are just you know, they include some kind of sacrifices because people always enjoy seeing that spirit times or material so what do you sacrifice pieces you know, here on their own right right left unsaid and eventually made opponents King. That's the that's the most popular consonant masterpiece, but you can have a very slow motion position a masterpiece you know by just adding you know disadvantage micro advantage after one after another and strike strangling your opponent. It could be a mixture of that. So, but you For

Eric Weinstein 19:14 example, described the current number one. Magnus Carlsen is a mixture of Karpov and Fisher Yes. And in Fisher was the obvious, sort of virtuoso at the level of masterpiece, but you pointed out the Karpov was a master of maximum efficiency of the power of an individual piece to do the most with the least.

Garry Kasparov 19:35 Yes, absolutely. And Magnus is is is this lethal combination of two because Fisher I think it just it was, it was a rough but it's, I mean, sheer energy. He could play until the last poem, you know, there's there's basically squeezing, you know, water out of stone. Now, carbon was good at adjusting in getting the maximum effect out of the minimum, you know, resources. He has He had available, but he was not as consistent especially not so pushy. He, you know, it's it's it was more relaxed. So Magnus brings them together. And as you know, he has corporals ability to to to maximize the effect of his pieces, but also he will play to the very last point the very last move as Vishal did,

Eric Weinstein 20:19 right. And, okay, so I think what you're telling me is, is that we are not yet able to figure out how to encode the concept of brilliancy so that we may lose to these machines, but that the poetry to be extracted from chess at one level belongs to this positional brute force aspect and another belongs to something that's ineffable that we can't quite touch.

Garry Kasparov 20:43 Yes, it's the

Eric Weinstein 20:46 and I took your point about the sacrifices that that's a sort of an obvious version of a risk. The

Garry Kasparov 20:50 interesting thing is it's the it's the, the latest chess computer prodigy grade alpha zero. That's the the program run by Demis Hassabis and his team it's the deep mind team that is working for Google they succeeded in beating the best go players then they just they came up with this concept of alpha zero which is you know starting from scratch so the machine knows only the rules where he's gone where these chairs what is a Starcraft any game and then you know plays against itself it learns from which all experience no human contamination which is very funny because one definition of genius is the fire that lights itself Yeah, but it's but yes and and it it played against stockfish against is one of the strongest chess engines and it beat it convincingly number of times.

Eric Weinstein 21:46 But then stockfish got better.

Garry Kasparov 21:48 Yeah, but it's still alpha zero still dominates the game now. Okay, when we're looking at games, you know, as a first time when I thought oh wow, I can learn something from this machine's alphazero play To chess more aggressively contrary to our expectations that stronger machines will play dollar games more you know just it's the slower more games because they every sacrifice can can be refuted. So that's why machines they don't take too much risk but alphazero contrary to our beliefs, you know, played very aggressive just sacrificing material and and and being beating stockfish machine not humans it's by just you know always being one or two moves ahead in anticipating what's coming next now it's I use Word sacrifice yeah but for deep for for machine for alpha zero it wasn't the sacrifice alpha zero thanks to its massive experience through these 660 million games six zero 60 million gates lays itself. So it generated a bank of data sources, which provided its you know, better understanding of patterns So when alpha zero sacrifice quote unquote is we saw it as a sacrifice it for alpha zero it was the transformation of a material pawns or pieces into other factors that were more deposition or momentum. Exactly. It's a momentum. So and it's, it's, it's, it's, it's amazing that it's alpha zero that that had, you know, just look at the fewer positions, it's about 1% of what you know, when you look at the at the at the number of positions analyzed, versus stockfish it was far more prescient in understanding what's coming next. Again, playing without the material stockfish You know, it took you know, one or two moves to actually understand what's coming because it looked at it again it's not that it's the combination was winning it when alphazero made sacrifices Yeah, it was not a forced win because stockfish would have seen it as well okay, but it's it was you know, it was getting deeper understanding of the game based on on on on it's it's a pattern that is it was able to do And out of these 60 million games,

Eric Weinstein 24:02 but in general, I would think about really, you can imagine me telling you what a brilliance is. It's ridiculous. I don't know. I don't know. Exactly. But it's but one thing I might define it as is anything that where there would be a body of conventional wisdom, and then there's a move that is deeply weird relative to that expectation. So for example, a move that doesn't seem to develop anything. It's like almost a waste. a throwaway move could also be a brilliancy if it turned out that that unlocked something nobody could

Garry Kasparov 24:31 see. Yeah, yes. Anything that surprises people, right? It's brilliant. Oh, yeah, maybe one of the most brilliant moves based on your definition I ever made was game 24. I played Anatoly Karpov. It's It was a unique moment. When you just you know, it's I had to survive this game and carpet win the game to to retain his title right one point ahead, and it was the last game of the match. And Cabo had a very new potential. Very strong attack. And I found a move that was totally illogical. By the way ever since this game this this, this idea became the part of the defensive concept for, for black. But at the time, you know, it was just it looked so ugly because you don't put this rocks you know just in this in a position where it has no other moves around the by by your own pieces, but it was not about you know, it's not about attacking basically it was a very good prophylactic moves because it prevented big threats from from from white, and it had to force carpets or looking for other plants. So no, it's and I was very happy when I just I don't know, I made this move, because I just didn't understand how else to defend it just was so much against you know what I learned but as I made the move, and I remember when I just you know it's this is when Powerpuff came to stage. She looked at this and then it's great, another great player, he realized that these move basically kill he's attacking you know, structure and it's a And he had to actually start regrouping pieces wasting time. And he just adding Yes, it's definitely the it's not as a strong move but he was so unusual move looking weird, but it's it should come with confidence and and and he quickly made mistake laws again. That's fantastic.

Eric Weinstein 26:17 Okay, here's a question that I've never been able to ask and maybe if it doesn't make sense you'll help me formulate a better one. I guess when we lost I mean checkers was solved. Yeah. Chess we lost with you in

Garry Kasparov 26:31 it. So golf, so.

Eric Weinstein 26:34 Yeah, okay. Okay. But the question is, after go, I sort of expected something to happen. That didn't happen. I expected someone to start trying to create a new game, which, in which humans would still have an advantage that had the deterministic characteristics, and everyone seems so demotivated by this experience, like what's the point? Why are we why race it's like trying To be continued to be a better number multiplier in an age of computers, there's no point have we become demotivated is anyone searching for things that show off and accentuate what humans still do better than any any machine?

Garry Kasparov 27:16 It's a very important question and existence. I think you just so it's like a homerun. Because it's that's that's a question that's in different modifications. I hear all the time since I now speak three times months. At the conferences at CES about AI it's about cybersecurity and about, you know, human machine collaboration.

Eric Weinstein 27:39 And about vanity.

Garry Kasparov 27:41 Yeah. So yes. The

The answer is that it's one of the motivators. I think we're more pragmatic. We seem to understand this doesn't make any sense. Because it's not just chess or God. It's a Starcraft, it's Texas Hold'em poker, it's in you name games, you know, and it's at the end of the day, machines will always prevail. So to make it easier for my audience to understand, I always tell them that every game can be described as a closed system. And if we have, if you build a closed system,

Eric Weinstein 28:21 eventually a computer will always win. Exactly.

Garry Kasparov 28:24 Yeah, that's it. So the human strengths is not you know, is not trying to compete with machines in closed systems, because if we know how to do it, machines will do better well, and not because they perfect again, that's important. They will never reach 100% perfection. It doesn't exist in in the universe, but they will make fewer mistakes. So machines will always you know, outperform humans by you know, by minimizing number of mistakes, or it's not just a number of mistakes, machines do not make blunders, so they get the gravity of machines mistakes or inaccuracy, right? It's not as you know, sometimes humans could do something wrong. really stupid.

Eric Weinstein 29:00 If you ever looked at the history of electric guitar, no. So you have these very weird players, I'm just gonna riff off of your open versus closed games were probably the first great electric guitarist was a guy named Charlie Christian, but he was really playing the guitar. And it happened to be electrified. By the time we get to people like Jimi Hendrix and Eddie Van Halen. Whatever we thought the vocabulary was that we were restricted to in the instrument, they showed us that the dimensionality of play was so much greater than we'd ever considered, for example, by bringing the amplification into the instrument and making it part of the instrument or with Les Paul creating the instrument as the recording studio, not just as the instrument. And so eventually these become closed games, but there is something about and to just fit with the theme of this series, The search for a portal out of the closed game into a higher dimensional space where something else is available. Like people talk about hearing Eddie Van Halen for the first time and their guitarist and they're thinking, I have no idea what I'm listening to how do those noises come from that man? Are there any sort of innovations like that, that

Garry Kasparov 30:19 you think where computers can start looking for ways out of the closed systems into higher dimensions? I don't think so. I think machines will not be able, in the foreseeable future, if not indefinitely, to understand how to transfer knowledge from one closed system to another. Can machine ask questions? Yes. They just don't know what questions are relevant.

Eric Weinstein 30:43 Well, so I give this example quite a bit. But there's a very powerful concept in pure mathematics, of taking square roots of various objects where, like with with real numbers, it's quite clear what a square root should be. But even when you get to the negative numbers, You end up having to go outside of the real numbers to answer a question about the square root of negative seven. And you can take the square roots of rotations, you can take the square roots of determinants of matrices, and you find these structures that nobody knew were hiding there. So one of the things we've learned in pure mathematics is that there is a way of going from a closed system into a larger closed system and that one moment, the closed system reveals itself to be open. Is that something that you imagined?

Garry Kasparov 31:32 No, again, I am not sure it's the it's it's a legitimate comparison. Because again, it's it's heroes, it's decision making. It's in math, you know, there's the there are answers or math, you know, just it's it's one way or another, you know, you have an answer and it's it's it's not a straightforward it could be you know, just crude but at the end of the day, you know, that this this there's a solution. game of chess is not or any other game. It's not math. It's not you know, there's no prophets of the heart. disagreed with you gh hardy wrote that chess is real mathematics, but of a trivial kind in the sense that he didn't mean trivial that it was easy or that it wasn't beautiful, he meant that it didn't connect to anything else because they were the rules were artificial. And so what it told you about was simply internal to the world. But But again, as in math, you have perfect solutions in chess, sometimes have perfect solutions, but in most cases, it's based on your assumption, so is this and it's, it's, you know, the good machines will always win not because they see the perfect solution. Again, 10 to the 46 power, right number of legal moves, but because they make fewer mistakes, right visors, so they will be closer to perfection than humans, right. So as the weather is much closer, just close, it doesn't matter. So there will be always ahead. So same with every other game. So all you need is to provide machine with the rules and machines will start operating you know just on their own by by creating the data Though I have to say that it's today alpha zero still quite an exception most of the machines today 99% if not 99.9%, they are doing not transformation. But optimization is still you know, operating with human generated data. But the future, I have no doubt it's for alpha zero type computers, you know, they will be it's like a new computer with AI algorithms. And the, the, it's they will require some form of human guidance. It's like I always call these you know, the future computer experts shepherds, so there will be nudging the flocks of intelligent algorithms one way or another. But it's it's still you know, there will still need to be nudged. So it's, it's, it's, you're moving from one system to another, it's one closed system to another pole system will require human guidance. What is very important for us to recognize is that our role percentage wise, is shrink. Yeah, but it doesn't mean that We become expendable. So actually, I think it's we're getting we could become even more important in this machine collaboration, because we will be deciding how these massive brute force Yeah, where they will be moved, we know right or left or whatever up and down. Well,

Eric Weinstein 34:18 if I'm honest about that, the way in which I received, what you just said is that in the short term, I think we become more important because the least interesting things are taken over by the computers. And then if we're smart, we invest in what it is that we do best, which is often this act of brilliance induction, opening a closed system into a larger one, which temporarily opening it up. And that's exciting. However, I do feel that this is a short term, win for humanity on short term to be well, I worry that this is on the order of decades, not centuries,

Garry Kasparov 34:58 for your needs, probably Not a very short circuit.

Yeah, it's Look, why do we go too far? So this is when we, you know, the strengths of humanity was always to to respond to the challenges that we are that the here now yeah table, right? I don't want us to spend time I would say waste our time debating what what can or may may happen may not happen 30 4050 years from now, we have challenges that we should address right now. And I think that the it's time for us to understand how we can maximize the the, the benefits out of human machine collaboration Well,

Eric Weinstein 35:43 okay, so I had a very funny interaction preparing for my interview with you today, which is that I spoke to two brilliant young women, one of whom just released 25,000 new stock photos of people who don't exist generated by her AI. She's a PhD from Berkeley, the other of which is a brilliant musician, but arguably also one of the world's most stunningly beautiful women as a supermodel. And I noticed that the ELO system that you use for chess can be used in any situation where if like, if you asked, well, who would who would people find more beautiful person a or Person B, and then you have a prediction. So you could use an ELO system and I asked my friend, the supermodel name is Charlotte camel, would you be willing to subject yourself to a Kasparov versus the machine type competition where my other friend will attempt to generate photographs that are even more beautiful than any human being who has ever been? And we could try to figure out what the Elo rating is for simply feminine beauty. Now, that's a very different thing than a computational problem. On the surface, it may be a computational problem. To the hood, but what happened when I started looking through the friend's catalogue of stock photos is that I could see that you could very easily fall in love with the images that she generated even though they correspond to no human being they were filled with emotion you know, Grace, whatever you whatever it is that you associate most with being human. And yet she knew exactly how they'd been generated from her neural nets. That's pretty disturbing in some ways, would you not say so? Look

Garry Kasparov 37:30 that's you talking about images right still even still images still images now? Ed just for proper relations you need more than still images?

Eric Weinstein 37:39 Well, that's true but the idea she's able to animate a lot of these first of all into video

Garry Kasparov 37:44 that's that's that's that's becomes interesting be right moment. You start animating

Eric Weinstein 37:48 rises. That's it. And then a couple of our friends Jordan Peterson and Joe Rogan have done have put so many hours of data of their voice into the world, that we can now generate their voice so that they can't tell The difference between what they've said and what the machines. So we're, we're starting to get to the point. We also have programs that write sports stories simply from the statistics that come off the games in a credible fashion.

Garry Kasparov 38:13 It's the data. So right,

Eric Weinstein 38:14 what's the look? Do you know what, you know, what's here is that we've associated various things with our humanity. And I think your point about chess, which I just think is great, is don't make the mistake of holding those associations too tightly, because the machines will let you know that some of this is not having to do with being human at all.

Garry Kasparov 38:36 Yes, it's the decision making process is not you know, it's not just human prerogative forever, right. So it's Yes, we used to think that you know, it's these machines could do all sorts of work, but not you know, not to challenge our cognitive skills, right? At the end of the day, it's what's the difference? So is this it's the IDS again, it's machines could could help us in just Making progress in in, whether it's in the field of physical exercises or mental exercises, though again, this as it's, if you look at the statistics is that is this, I think is the McKinsey's report of 2016 us job market show that, you know, it's the only 4% of working activities. Yes. Required medium human creativity. Wow. 4% Yeah. So it means that for over decades, we have been trained people to work like machine like Michigan. No, no, we're shocked that many of these jobs they they are just you know, they do but I think zombie jobs they already dead. They just don't know every

Eric Weinstein 39:44 repetitive job has that character.

Garry Kasparov 39:47 But it could be it repetitive jobs does not necessarily, you know, it's it's, it's a physical one. If you don't know like, I never wrote repetitive jobs. You know, it's

Eric Weinstein 39:58 go race radiology with the One

Garry Kasparov 40:00 intellectual, right? And when people say oh yeah, but this many of these jobs, they are just in grave danger, right? But, you know what, it's thank you for mentioning radiology. Sure. So this is yes. You know, we know that human machine collaboration, right, you know, shows better results, then either want to do that either one individually. So that means that you know, you will have some experts, and from my experience in Aeron chairs in combination of human plus machines, right, you don't need the strongest minds. So the most talented players working with machine but someone who knows enough to give machines sodas, it's like it's a to guide machine not interfere with my superior knowledge. So that's why you may not need a top professor, but maybe you know, an assistant professor, maybe even an experienced nurse, right to work with his machine. Oh, but I hear you know, time and again. thousands of jobs, you know, there will be at grave risk. Maybe they'll be lost and it's the world pay jobs yet. But what is the what is the other side of this as well on this coin, the jobs will be lost, but the cost goes down more people could have access to that and when you look at the number of lives that can be saved, yes, in this country or especially in in the third world countries developing countries Yeah. So then you know all of a sudden you understand that it's it's while certain groups of people could be in danger because their computation or and machines they bring in you know, you know, havoc in our in our professional routine, but as a humanity will always win.

Eric Weinstein 41:34 But isn't it weird? How many of us are seeking drudgery that we wish, like you watch what happens when you liberate people and you find that they go back to these games on their computers that they play repetitively? You know, that there's a way in which humans we had always thought we wanted to be liberated to do creativity, but there's something terrifying about creativity and many of us actually seek repetitive activity which anesthetizes us and arguably We're happiest when we start behaving in a way that is machine learning

Garry Kasparov 42:04 again, but it's the that brings us back to us that bring us back to human. Yes. Because, you know, it's the, you know, it's instead of talking about killer robots, terminators, metrics and other horrors produced by Hollywood, so just as your neighbors here, so brainwashing, yeah, generations of

Eric Weinstein 42:23 pay no attention to dynamic. Yeah.

Garry Kasparov 42:25 Look, it's it's, it's a mess. It's quite primitive. Yeah. But it's it. Why don't we talk about you know, about humans using modern technology? Yes. How other humans because humans still have monopoly for evil. Right. Yeah. And it's and I think it's far more important out understand how this modern technology that has been designed, yes, in theory to make our lives better have been have been more used

right to undermine the very foundation of the free world.

Eric Weinstein 42:55 So what I that's a great opportunity to transition because if there's anything thing that I'm more interested in than talking about computers and poetry and all of these things. It's this bizarre moment that we find ourselves in. In the free world, where I've never seen anything like this in my life, it appears that there are almost no adults left in the system. It appears to me that there's almost no institution that really cares about ground truth. And it appears to me that we are right now in the process of sort of abandoning everything we built up for the most trivial of reasons. And I don't know whether you subscribe to this, but the transformation of our country intellectually to me, since slightly before the election of Donald Trump, to the present moment has been the most unexpected singularity in terms of the ability to hold conversations to analyze what it is that we in fact hold in common. Our sense making apparatus appears to have been broken down. And a large number of people don't even seem to be aware of this and I don't know How to explain how many different clusters of beliefs have now cropped up which appeared to be incapable of communicating with each other. You seen the same thing?

Garry Kasparov 44:10 Yes, yes. And I've been warning about it for quite a while. So I wrote the book winter's coming, just you know, before the presidential elections in 2016. And unfortunately, it is worrying. Nobody understood it. No, nobody wanted to hear this because it seemed that is just like being so far away, like the book didn't mention Trump or Syria, but you could read between the lines. That is this, because I really talked about Putin and about his his threat to the to the free world. So his war in the free world. That is just it was just a matter of time before the techniques that have been developed in Russia and tested in neighboring countries and in other European countries, that these techniques will be used to undermine American democracy. And also I talked about the growing vacuum in the world that was a result of the free world led by the United States to depart from its leadership role after the end of the Cold War. So it's Yeah, it's easy to say it's everything is about Donald Trump. But when you look at the Donald Trump phenomena, it has roots. Well, this is a it's a symptom. It's a symptom that somehow Trump you know, just demonstrated that the system was already so weak that is that it could it could have persons so unqualified to win elections by the rules I mean, that's it's Yes. Was foreign interference with other thing bigger

Eric Weinstein 45:38 exactly, or the adaptive landscape if you want to take the evolutionary metaphor was created and then suddenly, there was a creature that's gonna have

Garry Kasparov 45:46 Modena, but before we go to Trump, we should understand so why the system was so you know, it was weak enough susceptible, susceptible Yeah, just to to to succumb to Trump's it's not an evil genius. I mean, just it's I mean, it's just intellectually is always insulting to hear what he

said. But it's

but you know the man so you know, just it's so inlanders unqualified, but it's just, it's if you asked, you know, people to describe a potential threat to me as democracy. Yeah, you know, 20 years ago, so what what would be this, the image of these, you know, of these villain that would be threatening to the very foundation of American Republic, you could come up with somebody very intelligent, you know, very slick, you know, just it's more likely you have somebody like Bill Clinton, so that's his type, you know, very intelligent and well spoken,

Eric Weinstein 46:33 charming,

Garry Kasparov 46:34 charming, but not Trump. So but, so now let's go

Eric Weinstein 46:37 No, no, just Just so you know, I did write I think it was in 2013, and essay warning about what I thought was going to come up based on my understanding of professional wrestling, and professional wrestling is in some sense, something that mirrors some of the techniques that may have been developed in Russia because the propensity to suspend disbelief is not well understood. by many people who have a rational, enlightenment oriented bent,

Garry Kasparov 47:03 but it's easy, I still want to go back to 1992 sure, because it was the end of the Cold War. It was a moment of the greatest triumph of the free world. So it the Empire collapsed Soviet Union ceased to exist,

Eric Weinstein 47:15 and relatively peacefully No, perfect. Yes.

Garry Kasparov 47:17 Yes. It's just an amazingly amazingly Yeah, there were few wars, you know, on the pyramids,

Eric Weinstein 47:23 a Democrat was a race a lot of

Garry Kasparov 47:26 Putin. Yes, there was a very bloody war former Yugoslavia, but still, you know, the cost, you know, the human cost for for collapse of the evil empire was insignificant compared to what people expected, you know, would be would be the outcome exact now. And in 1992, one of the most popular books best selling book was the end of history by Francis Fukuyama. And I have to say I share the same expectations about, you know, the triumphant, a continuation of of The history of the free world and its liberal democracies one and, and the rest will be just, you know, get us doing some great things, but never never never to worry again about about threat to the free world coming from dictators and other you know, wow, that's that's what we expected 9192

Eric Weinstein 48:18 now what I expected but okay not what not to do not No, no, no, no I was I was terrified by the fact that this is what was claimed because I had thought it's how is it that a country like the US, which is needed counterweights in order for it to like, you know, you and I both have a Jewish component in our background. There's a weird way in which anti semitism, if it's at the if it's too low, we stopped being very Jewish. If it's too high, we're an incredible threat. You have two separate ethnic heritage, which show you how vulnerable and precarious life can be. Somehow what terrified me was the idea that we were going to take a bipolar system, which represented the Cold War. And suddenly removed one part of it without any plan as to how to manage this.

Garry Kasparov 49:05 Yes. Okay. That's a good point. Now, first of all, removing, you know, evil component of this dichotomy was a good idea. I grew up in the Soviet Union. What was bad, right is that, you know, it required a new plan. It did eat it, and nobody wanted to talk about that's the weird part. Now, I understand now being a money Monday morning quarterback. I, you know, I know exactly what was wrong. Actually, I knew about it when a few years ago. So in 1991 1992, it was America's role to start reconsidering, you know, it's global participation, no Soviet units, what's the plan? And one of the most important things was to address the reform of United Nations because the United Nations was built in 1945 as a successful failed League of Nations to prevent it. An open war open will move the conflict between USSR and USA. superpowers. It's but it was all about freezing conflicts and managed the World Conference but today it's thanks God, you know, there's been

Eric Weinstein 50:03 very it's been ridiculously successful

Garry Kasparov 50:05 there in 1962. It can close it was it was a Caribbean crisis, but it was basically basically for a couple of weeks. It was there was no real threat of world war three and goblins been amazingly

Eric Weinstein 50:16 quiet again. 42

Garry Kasparov 50:17 Yes, you look around the world. So this is you know, they will the wars that remove from Europe. Yeah. other continents. Yes. Well, but there was a korean war there was a Chinese Civil War. You know, this is then it's like, I hate

Eric Weinstein 50:32 to say it this way. But Europe is Vietnam. Europe is one of the world's most dangerous places. We don't think about it that way, because we've had this period of stability. That has been an anomaly

Garry Kasparov 50:43 you get European Oh, that had wars for centuries, right, you know, was pacified. So thanks to these United Nations concept of, you know, finding compromise to systems. Yes, they were fighting each other, but mostly proxy wars right around the world. Yes, that's why we had this James Bond movies, you know, and sometimes even James Bond cooperated with KGB officers to fight global evil. So it's the, it's it, we knew how to live in this world now 1991 you, right? So it's just, you know, the Soviet Union's gun. So what's next? It's the it's the idea that evil you know, disappears. It was dead wrong, because evil can be buried for a while under the rubble of the Berlin Wall. But the moment we lose our vigilance, it sprouts out. So United Nations that was built to freeze conflicts, right was not was not there to solve solve problems, and we need it we need to start looking for you know, solving problems. We need it, I believe, an organization that would be rather called legal democracies you know, just it's actually it's it's late Senator McCain used it but I have to say I use a separately. It's an organization where the members will not be just paying lip service. Okay, democracy So, America had to come up with a plan like in 1946, rebuilding Europe. Right global plan of spreading democracy and freedom and and and and we

Eric Weinstein 52:04 almost instantly got stupid,

Garry Kasparov 52:06 but it's the it's the then it's But again, it's human nature it's very difficult to tell people that you know that that recognize that for nearly half a century there was an existential threat, you know, potential threat of nuclear war and those who remember 1962 crisis and Vietnam War so oh wow it's all over. So why don't we just you know celebrate Why don't we get rich Why don't we just do other things stop worrying to others of the world you know it's sometimes I think that is if the Soviet Union collapsed a year later Yeah, probably bush 41 reelected because I think one of the reasons Clinton you know won the elections is not just ross perot which was important factor but but but the republicans lost that be caught so yeah, Cold War was over. So why do we need bush and in an economy stupid matar right in one day we turned inward Exactly. Now it's it's basically a matter It was still there because it was the only superpower. But it lost its, you know, its role as the, you know, as the stabilizing factor because Clinton 1992 you know, you won the elections in 2000 you know, you 2001 generally he walked away 1992 America was basically in the position to do whatever is make, you know, make any, any any suggestions that others had no choice but to accept in 2001, early Altai was ready to strike. So that's it. We missed, you know, we missed this this years. And also something else happened in eight years, Russia moved from a very fragile female democracy into the first, you know, into the next stage, that that that would be eventually dominated by KGB. In the year 2000. Vladimir Putin became Russian president. The fact is that, you know, in nine years after the statue of Felix divinsky, the founder of KGB has been removed from the bank square in less than nine years. Vladimir Putin became the president of Russia and the KGB Lieutenant Colonel, who immediately said that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century, who immediately returned solid anthem to make a symbolic gesture, who proudly said that there were no former KGB officers once KGB always KGB quote, unquote. So that was already a warning sign that things changing. Because this

Eric Weinstein 54:25 was another confusion that I had. My model for Russia is two separate things we Americans often don't set one. It's a barbell culture. It's got the highest of the high culture and the lowest of the low end to because of this, in some sense. There's a fractal nature to the Putin's. It's like Putin's all the way down. There's always a sort of a look for strength and leadership of a kind of uncomfortable way. Not just at the very top. It's the but it's

Garry Kasparov 54:54 Yes, but the uniqueness of putting the putinism of Vuitton's regime was It was not based on any ideology. Traditionally Russia always you know, followed some sort of the grand idea. Well, Empire communism,

Eric Weinstein 55:08 can I try one and then you tell me why it doesn't work D humiliation?

Garry Kasparov 55:12 No, absolutely. Absolutely no absolute nonsense it says they use it. They use it they use it for you know, it was a propaganda shtick, but it's just it's don't you

Eric Weinstein 55:20 don't think that there was a need to restore some kind of sense of identity? I remember people talking fondly about Stalin, I thought it was very confused,

Garry Kasparov 55:27 because in the last year of yeltsin, you know, they started, you know, just, you know, playing with this little soldier, right, because KGB was playing a bigger and bigger role, you know, going back to the early 90s, in Russia, after yeltsin shut down the Russian parliament in 1993, though I had no sympathy for Russian parliament, and I felt Yeltsin was right, because they were full of communists and nationalists, but he ruined just, you know, the balance of power that was just building up in Russia. And it was again since 1993. It was all powerful executives, and the Russian constitution that in theory in adopted 993 was a good document gave, you know, enormous power to the President, if he wanted to abuse it, it was just it was on paper to look good, but it almost it almost eliminated, you know, the key key elements of checks and balances of the control of the, of the executive power, which is in Russia, traditionally was just, you know, was was dominant force. And in 1994, the first Chechen War where they showed that the country was moving in the wrong direction, and 1996 elections was already it was free but not fair. And then selecting a successor, which by itself is not democratic process selecting drives nominating him, yeltsin came up with a Nielsen's family, not just immediate family, but family as the as the group of advisors causes oligarchs, the circle oligarchs, they came up with a KGB Lieutenant Colonel. So it was more about preserving the enormous wealth that it concentrated at time. The the humiliation was just you know, it's for the for the general public but it's it's the Russia and the Putin you know the strengths of Putin's regime is that they don't care about ideology Putin. Putin could become nationalists could become a sort of the populist could be imperialist identity. He doesn't care what what is power and well, exactly, it's all it's more like a muffled state. That's why I say that every country has its own mafia. In Russia. Math has its own country. So that's that's it's something quite unique. And Putin believes in only in power of money. And he just discovered that point quite early in his presidency that money can buy anyone anything and and that's the problem for this was a free world losing Russia, also losing Soviet Union as an existential enemy right. So the free world lost its sense of danger so it is its own now let's you know, let's let's make deal so who cares? We are you know, we are

Eric Weinstein 57:57 invincible Well, we keep looking for a new Soviet Union we whether it's China, the environment, Islamic terror, we're trying to find it.

Garry Kasparov 58:05 Yes. But the free world, you know, is much weaker. You know, I remember it's, it's few years ago, I spoke to one of my friends in New York and we talked about it after my book was published winter's coming. And we talked about challenges to the free world. And I said, in 1948, Joseph Stalin wanted to take over was Berlin. It was he, he announced a blockade run, Harry Truman said, you know, how we defend West Berlin, it was a biggest, you know, boulders decision that American president would make. And for 11 months, US and British planes supplied was brilliant with everything needed to survive, and Stalin decided against shooting shooting this plane. So he knew that Harry Truman was not a man just to to know. Exactly. So and I said, Look, Harry Truman faced I mean, Joseph Stalin, and this is wrong. Today, not put in Joseph Stalin, Russia today in 2015 is a pale shadow of Stalin's Soviet Union, militarily economic salute. And you know what he said? Quite sadly, you know, sign and said, Yes, but America today is also pale shadow this America

Eric Weinstein 59:18 of hair. This is the horrible truth, which is that in a weird way, Putin appears to be relatively in my way of thinking. One of the most skilled players left on the chessboard.

Garry Kasparov 59:30 No, I just I, you know, I have to disagree. I have to defend the integrity of my game. So Putin is not a chess player.

Eric Weinstein 59:37 No, sir. Sorry. Sorry. He's

Garry Kasparov 59:38 easy. He's an important.

No, it's just it's the Putin Putin doesn't create these opportunities. He uses them so he grabs the Okay. Let me say it differently. Putin strengths is is is is a weakness of the free Well,

Eric Weinstein 59:52 yes, but the KGB had a tremendous amount of know how it was resident within that.

Garry Kasparov 59:58 Yeah, but no, he was fine. But Katie GB and he has enormous amount of cash now yes well I think we'll put in controls more money than any other individual in history richest, richest human it's it can his when when his people say oh how rich is putting who didn't put in this mega rich but it's not you know it's not the same kind of wealth that you know that's like a blank game or asleep or Bezos or whoever because it all depends on him staying in power. But when you look at the amount of money Vladimir Putin can move directly or indirectly, you probably talking about something like a $1 trillion instead $1 trillion Yeah, it just you you add Russian and oh budget you add Russian, Russian hard currency reserves the the fortunes of some of the top Russian oligarchs

Eric Weinstein 1:00:46 okay to to Putin, but he's skilled. He's ruthless. He's a single decision maker and he has this level of control over resource. Yes. There's no no equal to that. Unless it's the Chinese

Garry Kasparov 1:00:59 No, no. thing is he has more power probably than seeds in a relatively to can to to to the country because seeds and beans resources are just incompatible the poor farmers such as China is much stronger than and I think symptom pain and Chinese communists are very happy to see Putin creating these problems because it you know, it helps them to shift their attention. China is a strategic threat if you're using jet lag, right, a long term strategic threat. Okay, well, so Putin is more of a tactical threat. But right now this is you know, that's this is a real threat because if you're King is under threat of being mated, you just think about long term consequences of the end game. Alright,

Eric Weinstein 1:01:37 well, so let's hit another chest term, and then I'll pull the ripcord if it doesn't work. There's a concept which not everyone knows called zugzwang. Yes, where where you are in a situation where you prefer not to have to move because anything you do actually puts you in a word I don't you have to move. Why do we keep acting as if we're in zugzwang?

Garry Kasparov 1:01:57 Now, that's, let me go back to what I said. Feel Moments ago, Putin strengths is our weakness. Yes, Putin is good at looking at opportunities like and then any strikes. He doesn't create them. But the moment he says weakness, it's animal instinct, you know, he goes for kill, right? So why Vladimir Putin's in Syria? because America walked away because America created vacuum there. So when you look at the Global Map, why put in zero there? Because the free world, you know, blinked didn't want to interfere? And that's what we learned, I hope actually I was wrong, had to learn from the 1930s is the if we see rising dictatorship, yes, and and, and dictatorship that is is is is is challenging, the very foundation of our world. And we know we have a choice of confronting an early or postponing the decision trying to appease a dictator, every day, every week, every month every year of a delay, pushing the price up. Well,

Eric Weinstein 1:02:54 this is what's very scary to me about Tulsi Gavin's candidacy, which is that she's pushing this concept regime change wars. And she's trying to you know, after

Garry Kasparov 1:03:04 us I'm you know, is the moment you mentioned the name so I almost jumped on my chair, although I don't I don't understand this. Yeah, I it is the democrats will not allow any, any any climate change denier. Right. Right, the show how they allow a genocide denier on stage. I mean, she's just, you know, she acts like a like, I don't want I don't know about the details of your relations with Assad or Putin, but she's supporting the most brutal dictators on the planet. And she What do you think she thinks she's doing? I don't know what she's doing and I and I'm not hearing another business of analyzing you know, what is the reason the payroll or not I don't care. What is she saying? And by the way, she has some falling look at it. You know, she has presented here and there but you know, what stage and it's and she's not confronted, she's defending Bashar Al Assad, one of the one of the worst dictator who use chemical weapons. She's denying it. I didn't hear any democrat taking her on it. So taking expensive what, how are you doing here? And is it and that's it. That's for pooches is

Eric Weinstein 1:04:05 Gary, what's going on in some sense is just as you were saying in 1991 92, we started it's the economy stupid, as if the rest of the world went away. We were going to just abandon all of our opportunities, obligations, what have you. We're now not capable of formulating an America that makes sense as a continuation of our previous

Garry Kasparov 1:04:26 you said he got this. It's the it's America from 1946 to 1991 was a thing. Well, no, it just, it had certainly no policy that followed. You had Harry Truman set up certain rules and institutions, and then you had Republicans, Democrats, Republicans following the plan. And it led to a victory in example, because the strength of democracy, yeah, it's it's a strategy again, using gestures, because you can rely on continuity. You can change administrations and but but you still have the plan. It could be Yeah, it could be some deviations. You know, it could be you know, just you know, One way or another, you know, somebody could be more aggressive, more, you know, more defensive but at the end of the day we were trying to become

Eric Weinstein 1:05:06 captains of the same team now it looks like we're wanting to be captains

Garry Kasparov 1:05:09 going back to 91 Yeah, American foreign policy game you know, more like a pendulum shifting, you know, one side from one side to another based on who is in the Oval Office. There's no Clinton bush Obama Trump this it's this is the wall and the rest of the world to the rest of the world is watching but what is just it's an it's paralyzing

Eric Weinstein 1:05:30 fear, you're looking at a car that swerving exactly in the leg,

Garry Kasparov 1:05:33 but people used to know that the Americans there whether it's, you know, no, it's Eisenhower or Kennedy or Johnson, Nixon 40 when reagan Carter so Bush, America was there Okay, so how all of a sudden, it's you can no longer live in America, but it's you have massive Korea it's vacuum holes, right and

Eric Weinstein 1:05:56 your you know, Millennials have any intuition of where our passion is coming from No, no, I'm saying something has broken in terms of our collective understanding of ourselves. We are having the most irrelevant, bizarre, non fact based non theory based conversations.

Garry Kasparov 1:06:18 Like children, but you said No, in fact, based that's one of the problems. That's what Putin's of this world want us to forget history. So it is now now you're talking about World War Two. And so who cares? It's not relevant,

Eric Weinstein 1:06:29 it is relevant, oh my god,

Garry Kasparov 1:06:31 because, you know, we we could see, you know, this is how, you know, Putin is basically you know, just it's, it's conquering the not territory's but you know, but it's, it's actually it's a conrail minds by conducting very successful.

Eric Weinstein 1:06:44 So let's go to that. What is it that the Soviet Union and then Russia understands about the human mind that the US needs to understand ASAP but cannot figure out how to teach its own people?

Garry Kasparov 1:06:59 Look at it Don't think that we can compare source propaganda and Putin's Putin's machine propaganda machine, for simple reasons Soviet Union had a

Eric Weinstein 1:07:07 had an ideal, and I don't Yeah, I took your point. It's

Garry Kasparov 1:07:10 ideology. It's a, again, my mother, she's, she's 82. She was born under Stalin 1977. So she still lives in Moscow. She heard it all style in crucial Brezhnev and drop of Gorbachev and others. And she's, she's watching this television, and she keeps telling me that as Gary, it's much worse than ever, because

Eric Weinstein 1:07:35 it's much worse than anything

Garry Kasparov 1:07:37 is because before we had some ideals, yeah, they were false ideals. But is it the it was, it was all about bright future. Every ideology has its future. It could be a horrible idea, even like, like Nazism, but again, they try to sell you the image of the future. Okay, Putin doesn't care about the future. It's the Putin's ideology in Russia. It was like a cult of death. It was surrounded by an It means you have to rely on

Eric Weinstein 1:08:02 confusion. Everything is confusing. Yeah.

Garry Kasparov 1:08:05 And they discovered that, you know, instead of selling an ideology, it's always vulnerable. Right? The moment I give you, the idea is not so sure it is. So you

Eric Weinstein 1:08:13 can tell what the ideas are everything slips through your fingers. It's a quick silver

Garry Kasparov 1:08:17 show. It's in 2004 2005. Yeah. So you know, it's they had to make a decision. Yeah. How to fight Russian opposition on the internet. Yeah, I just at the time, where I just was about to stop my just career and as I tried to help Russian opposition to

Eric Weinstein 1:08:33 your early mornings, yes,

Garry Kasparov 1:08:34 yeah. My early 40s in 2004 2005. And they made an ingenious decision that's based on the KGB experience, instead of following Chinese model, firewall, clothes, you know, just, you know, make people starve of information, traditional dictatorships. They said, How about doing it's exactly the opposite. You know, it's, it's, instead of, you know, closed it closing every now So what about the flock of Yeah, flooding this information by just you know, creating so much information here and there. So for people just to get lost, and you can have prob the newspaper from page, one story that everyone must follow Nine O'Clock News, or you can start, you know, just, you know, dividing this, this this story in into many poisonous elements and start spreading them in the true stories. Okay,

Eric Weinstein 1:09:25 so this is that's, you know, it's what this is now all through our countries, they're coming from Russia.

Garry Kasparov 1:09:29 Yes. Is this in 2005?

Eric Weinstein 1:09:31 The transmission mechanism? Do you

Garry Kasparov 1:09:35 think this is gonna get safer?

Eric Weinstein 1:09:36 They want to get

Garry Kasparov 1:09:37 into this they they, they decided just that they'll start creating these fake websites, right when I say fake websites or real websites, sure, but they looked like you know, very liberal websites. They talked about certain things. They could even criticize Putin. Yeah, some of them you noticed, but they always carried a little bit of piece of story here and there. But

Eric Weinstein 1:09:55 you and I have been talking very critically about Trump and the Republicans. nomina as inhabiting this landscape, part of the problem we've had is that the the Democratic Party went kleptocratic in the center and started pursuing policies that started like, let's say, widening the Gini coefficients, so that we had greater inequality. And we started experimenting with our own American style of nonsense. So right now we have a situation in which let me give you my feelings. I've been a lifelong Democrat. I don't trust my party as far as I can throw them. I don't trust the New York Times, Washington Post. I don't trust Fox News, the republicans obviously because that's transparently wrong. There is no ground truth. There's no place to go. And people are tuning into this podcast. And by the way, I'm going to force you to come back to this podcast because we need more time. Right now. We're mostly talking to millennials and the millennials are hungry, because they have an idea of we came in on this game, we have no idea what we missed. Everything makes no sense. Where can I find some concept of overarching continuity to make sense of a world that is disintegrating and

Garry Kasparov 1:11:05 this is the toilet paper, okay? It says this just just let's finish, you know, this is the story about fake news and troll factories. That's what Putin created. That's what KGB created, and they recognize it's far more effective and let's say they have to deal with Garry Kasparov on these folders yeah you can go off the Gary's oh is this American agent he's just you know, he's a bad guy he's been working for CIA for Mossad whatever. Some people who believe he knows doesn't look

Eric Weinstein 1:11:30 he sells drugs he sells good. He read

Garry Kasparov 1:11:32 many many many intelligent bills and now is this he was great you know, so rich, I'm burning. This is probably the most decorated solid Russian Natural History snow so for them it's a different story. Yeah, this they managed to create you know, this. It's a fake, you know, debates you have a whole page. Yeah, that is it's totally you know, just designed you know, elsewhere but it comes to, it's on on social media. Somebody says Gary Kasparov is a bad guy and then somebody is coming. No, no, no, no, no. He's a great guy. He's, but you know, I'm not so sure. And this is and then you have a whole if it wasn't for his drinking

Eric Weinstein 1:12:05 problem, none of me I wish he had paid

Garry Kasparov 1:12:07 us. No, it's just it's the most typical one was Gary was a greatest champion but unfortunately got it's, you know,

Eric Weinstein 1:12:13 he went to his head. Yeah. It's and you understand that it's a book to me I could write but I could see right like as if I could possibly be the author the level of nonsense

Garry Kasparov 1:12:25 but never have known since because people again this is these know gravitas this is you know, for us to understand what is it what is right is this unique? Nobody what is ground zero where

Eric Weinstein 1:12:34 nobody has been kept aside like, you keep a fire extinguisher under glass in case of emergencies. There's no adult that's ready to go when things

Garry Kasparov 1:12:44 get bad. They recognize that is the new social media could offer them enormous opportunities to spread this fake news because there's one way to tell the truth many ways to lie. So it's that typical story was was me It was mid 17, the the Malaysian boyfriend was shot by Russian missile. Right. And it's they, you know, they didn't care to provide, you know, a one one narrative that could could review the at the the the widespread conviction of Russia what it did they spread all sorts of news and one day on Russian television on two different channels. Yeah, there are two competing stories, right, which is and with experts diagrams, again, who cares if it's if it's a 10 different lies people say I don't know just it's

Eric Weinstein 1:13:33 it's a needle in a haystack and they always give you a haystack

Garry Kasparov 1:13:35 you know, in 2015 Yeah, I said that if to Facebook that your business model Yeah. Is the honeypot for Russian bear no kidding. Yeah. Because it was so obvious you know, this, it was a huge opportunity. So this is how to use it use choose to stew to affect people's mind with information that could be most you know, sensitive.

Eric Weinstein 1:13:56 Well, this is the this is a very strange thing is that I know these guys in Silicon Valley, they're very smart in a very limited way. And they are so childlike

Garry Kasparov 1:14:05 but they they have no idea is it's the this understand that is the Buddha already had the machine it before he attacked America with this news industry right so he already had 10 times his own tanny. Russia, then Russian speaking minorities in the neighboring countries right then Europe. So the attacking America was just a matter of time. And I don't think Putin will expect it to be so successful because the way the Russian propaganda handle it. I think they expected Trump to lose elections narrowly. Yeah, that's what expectations and that's why Trump already repeated the the the Russian narrative rigged elections, how many times from a rigged election

Eric Weinstein 1:14:42 thing that you did, which was very interesting. You said, Look, all you need to know to impeach Trump is one thing, which is how he handled Ukraine now, whether I agree with you or I don't agree with you. Your point was, look, it's very important not to get caught up in very complicated stories. Let's keep it super simple. So the You can just stay on one point. Is that fair representation of your correctly?

Garry Kasparov 1:15:04 I think that's By the way, I think he he had other impeachable offenses. Yes. So but but your point was, but if you stay in this battle, because right now, the moment you you accuse Trump of numerous crimes that I believe he committed, it will be very, very easy for we can see the for that for for Trump's defenders to sort of to to to sort of dilute it is my commentary

Eric Weinstein 1:15:30 that has that has to do with the corruption in the in the Democratic side, because you can see that the New York Times and The Washington Post are not behaving as honest actors. And it's very clear at the moment that they're not, you have this different problem, which is I can't like I spent almost all my time criticizing the left, not the right not because I think the right is okay, it absolutely isn't. But because if the left continues to pursue these petty transactions, parent, ridiculous many propaganda operations, we've undercut our own credibility in any place that cannot get all the sudden

Garry Kasparov 1:16:08 what I hate Moses hypocrisy. And is this now, you know in the next democratic debates, I will hit one question. Yeah every every every democratic hopeful on stage if it was a simple yes or no Will you will you authorize sell of lethal weapons to Ukraine? Yes or No. Because you Trump was on Trump was on trial for that, will You're not? I'm afraid most of them will say no. And that shows the hypocrisy that says get at the end of the day, Trump's foreign policy. Just don't kill me for that. Not so different from Obama's Trump. The motivation is different. But Obama retreated because of his beliefs. It says like ideological retreat, Trump doing these things for profit, but it's but unfortunately, you know, the the outcome you

Eric Weinstein 1:16:54 don't believe that Trump is under direct control of Putin, or does it matter,

Garry Kasparov 1:16:58 but that's okay. That's it. for profit, yeah, Trump is Russian acid. I said it many times. Yeah, it is. Whether you understand it or not, it's not the story. Trump is Russian acid. I don't even have to know all the details.

Eric Weinstein 1:17:09 Your point is that the incentive structures are

Garry Kasparov 1:17:12 all I grew up in the Soviet Union, and I just I can I can repeat it time again. I met enough KGB colonels. Yeah. And I know how these people look at you. Yeah. So the way we put in looks at Trump is the way KGB handled looks at his asset. He looks at NorCal at McCrone with a contempt it's a contempt because he, he believes he can buy anyone on this planet. Unfortunately, they fail to realize, but the way you look at Trump the way they act, they're, it's this it's this this this, you know, this wry smile and this is snort, snort. Trump is an acid. He believes the trumpet for some reasons will do whatever he wants. And by the way, it's the Trump you know, it's when people say how can you say that now? Okay, I

Eric Weinstein 1:17:55 won the Democratic Party asserts that Donald Trump would win When somebody inside of the traditional left of center, media or political apparatus starts to assert that Donald Trump is under the direct control, as opposed to the incentive control, like even

Garry Kasparov 1:18:12 to advance at the end of the day is Trump's Look,

Eric Weinstein 1:18:14 you're not my point, Gary, what I'm trying to say is, there's a problem right now, with, we can't form a sense making, we can't form a story that enough of us can participate in to start actually dealing with our real problems. We're just in freefall. And whether or not I sign on to everything that you say about Trump or not. I know that if you and I have enough time, we can at least figure out what we agree on what it is agree on what the theories are.

Garry Kasparov 1:18:44 We have another common denominator. So that says clear. This is from our conversation. You may disagree with many things, but at the end of the day, we know where we are where we stand. So our disagreements would be more with tactical notice strategical character.

Eric Weinstein 1:18:55 Yes. So what what I'm concerned about is that right now, we're sitting Duck because we're not actually be there. There are no adults that I can find anywhere on the stage.

Garry Kasparov 1:19:05 Because again, it's it's the it's the, it's the again, America has to reinvent itself. It has to Yeah, we consider what is America's role. And this is and again, it says you go back to the democratic debates, they told me about things that they they might be very important. Again, it says I understand, you know, you should talk about healthcare, you should talk about other issues that are important, you know, for America long term, but right now, you have the foundation of the Republic is in jeopardy. You have Trump who is I don't I don't want to repeat it is Russian acid but it's let's say he's not

Eric Weinstein 1:19:36 but it's it doesn't matter your your assertion is but

Garry Kasparov 1:19:40 but look at look at what he what he has been doing because you know, if he were Russian acid, what he could do differently. So this is it's the it's even even he's you know, he's famous betrayal of Kurt's infamous, of course. So he spoke to around October 6, October 7 put his birthday he announced The greatest American retreat and it's for next couple of days Russian television was celebrating this the pictures of Americans camps was food on the table saying Americans were running away because our great leader you know, pushed him out. So that's the so another coincidence I always say I believe in coincidences but I also believe in KGB yeah and when this every time you know, we dealt with cases and Trump it ends up with Russia

Eric Weinstein 1:20:24 Gary, why are you still alive?

Garry Kasparov 1:20:26 It's a good question. Yeah, so

Eric Weinstein 1:20:28 are you here because you're still useful to him?

Garry Kasparov 1:20:32 Look I you know it's it's it's everything you know, has its price so I can I try not to be just an easy target. I don't go

Eric Weinstein 1:20:39 to Gary. I don't believe this for a second if he wants you gone. He's cutting Have you gone?

Garry Kasparov 1:20:43 Thank you very much. So my wife will be there happy to hear

Eric Weinstein 1:20:45 that no, no look, so but this is the years we're having a grown up conversation of grown up homeless. Yeah,

Garry Kasparov 1:20:50 I know that. So what you know I, I say what I say at the end of the day again, it's the it's it's voice

Eric Weinstein 1:20:57 Yes.

Garry Kasparov 1:20:58 But look, if they will The gun I'm sure you know they can they can do it. So it doesn't change anything my behavior. Yeah, I noticed that. Yeah. So that's the,

Eric Weinstein 1:21:06 by the way, I just want to say how much I admire that.

Garry Kasparov 1:21:09 Okay. Again, it's Would it help so people,

Eric Weinstein 1:21:11 I don't think you could do anything else.

Garry Kasparov 1:21:12 No, but it's I have to do just, you know, do what you must so be that's what I learned, you know, as a kid from Soviet dissidents, they will see it's the and and again, just going back to this, it's not you know, Trump was a symptom. Okay. Let me give you some shows how, you know, falling you're pointing right. That's it's how this society how this great country lost its way and it's, and that's why Trump Trump Trump is you know, he's still there.

Eric Weinstein 1:21:35 So you and I have a mutual friend and Peter teal. We're very surprised that Peter backs Trump

Garry Kasparov 1:21:40 disappointed. Yeah, but look, he's a businessman. I understand why he did it. I think it's just it's a wrong decision. It's bad for the country. So maybe good for his business. But it's the I mean, from day one when I heard about it, I was unpleasant Listen, surprised because I you know, it's not getting not just saying things now. You know, from the first day of Trump's campaign have been is one of the most vocal critics. Yeah, by the way, speaking about the media, please is one of the reasons Trump was there is because New York Times or The Washington Post and CNN, they liked him. From your sensitivity, their business, not only business model for 16 years. Yeah. The Democratic Party, right, as served as the political branch of Clinton Foundation. Right was one goal to lead unelectable woman to President United States. In 2000. He lost Obama that had to be eat, but they tried again, any I mean, Joe Biden would have trashed Trump in 2016. So Hillary Clinton was the only chance for Trump but they wanted Trump because they knew Trump was the only person she could beat. She would have said no chance against it's more than Republican. So they want the Trump right. So this is good. It's it's and that's why Trump got all this for free publicity in hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars of free publicity, and they could have killed Trump when he attacked. john mccain if the CNN of this world wanted to go after Trump in summer 2015 they could have good I agree intermediate whatever plus sank these sheep. You know, just before he left harbor

Eric Weinstein 1:23:12 question Jeffrey Epstein died under bizarre circumstances and the the amount of follow on this story the entire world wants to know is there a tie to the intelligence community? I don't see papers getting the denials from an intelligence communities. I don't see any very significant attempt to talk about whether or not like all you need is to get somebody to say this person was never an asset they were never under under us or foreign protection. What do we learn when things that are supposed to happen because they would sell papers they're of interest to everybody in there the natural thing to do simply don't happen in full view of the world. Look, it's the you have any Do you have an explanation? Do you think this is

Garry Kasparov 1:23:56 interesting or not? It? lets you know it's it's It always happened

before but we didn't have the same knowledge. So that's the only difference is now there's this people died in people that have that type of website they used to die in prisons under suspicious circumstances for decades if not centuries, but only now we know about it. But at the end of the day, who cares? Because it can look public, you know, it's attention,

Eric Weinstein 1:24:25 always murder suicide or whatever, it doesn't interest me that much. That's not the issue. The issue is is that it's like dark matter you don't detect it directly. You see all sorts of other things behaving bizarrely around it. And so you know that there's something there

Garry Kasparov 1:24:40 I look we know it's something's there because again, it's just it's the wild wild we have so much information available, get our attention spans are so short that you move from just one one thing to another. So is this I wonder how many you know how many listeners you will immediately pick up Jeffrey Epstein. There was so many scandals, and that's what Trump knows. You know? He knows that you know if he's tried for one note, one note treasonous. I think it's it's it's bad. But it's but if he's tried for 10 years,

Eric Weinstein 1:25:08 we have a metal. Let me just tell you we have an amazing audience. We have people who are attracted to it but but it's amazing how many things people forget because you have a new scandal. You know? That's no I understand that. But I'm what I'm trying to say is that the people who are tuning into this are people who are they're sick of being in the matrix, they just they want out and that's why it's called the portal because the people looking for an exit from the confusion. So I'm going to tell you this, you are coming back to the show because I am so not finished with you. It's been a fantastic

Garry Kasparov 1:25:38 when you say it's not finished, you know, that's, we have to be warning.

Eric Weinstein 1:25:44 You And is there anything you want to talk about about RDI? Before I let you go and send you along your

Garry Kasparov 1:25:52 way? No, it's the it's I have the Trump election. So with some of my friends, you know, I called them you know, refugees from The Wall Street Journal like Bret Stevens, Max booth Now, of course, well, so those who just couldn't, you know, couldn't stand from so let's say, and few model democrats in New York. So we got together and we decided to come up with an organization we call it renew democracy initiative. Okay, so are the i.org now has a website on invite me, I'd be delighted, you know, Justice this the and the idea was that, you know, this is it's an it's a US bombing experience that democracy is under, you know, it's it's, it's it's a great danger. It's a great threat when it's attacked from both sides from radicals. People, sometimes they think that, oh, Hitler won elections in Germany, he never won elections. You know, it is not the majority, the best result of Nazi Party 1932 was just over 37%. But at the same elections, communists made nearly 16 Yeah, which means half of the German more than half of your population rejected, rejected a democracy. So that's what we saw is that you know, it's a Trump's brutal assault on on liberal democracy, and our freedoms but at the same time we saw the growing power of the far left so called progressive wing attacking the very foundation of the of the free market. And these two forces they are just you're threatening to dilute the very foundation of American society

Eric Weinstein 1:27:15 This is why it's important to get rid of the kleptocracy in our center because you need a center that is allegedly

Garry Kasparov 1:27:21 have been shouting for unfold for years. Yeah, for more than a decade are too big to fail. Yeah, against the very principle of capitalism. I you know, I said it as many times as it was the Cato Institute and Milton Friedman award for Let's baltoro Jun 2013. I did a keynote and I said that it's if a small business in North Carolina is bankrupt is it goes belly up so much Goldman Sachs. So it's it's, it's I mean, the whole idea that you know, you can use taxpayers money supporting big corporations because they are, you know, indispensable, but they grew up on bigger now. So

Eric Weinstein 1:28:00 does that extend for Harvard? Should Harvard be allowed to fail should for example the Democratic Party be allowed to fail financially? As you know, Donna Brazil was asserting that Hillary Clinton was essentially the only thing propping up the Democratic Party. I don't

Garry Kasparov 1:28:13 know. This is it's the it's the system again, we I want people who say capitalism failed, as I say it, capital hasn't failed us, we failed capitalism, violating fundamental principles of free market, which is you know, you bankrupt, right, you fail, right, your other business, somebody else will will replace you. That's what's the whole idea. And right now, we just, it's all about your connections to the government. It's all connections to to to those who have money and power. And you could see that money and power. They just, you know, they are getting closer and closer. It's it's almost, you know,

Eric Weinstein 1:28:42 which organizations are you putting other than ardea? What are you putting your faith in?

Garry Kasparov 1:28:46 nobody's looking Oh, you think Soros is a positive force? So is a partisan force. That's a problem, you know? Yeah. The idea was RDI was to bring people on both sides. So we have a board now that brings people from both sides to former senators. Heidi heitkamp and I both came from Alaska. So okay, both Democrats Blue Dog Democrats, right. The idea is this and we're working with Donald's many of them are just you know, are former Republicans, the republicans are looking for building something in the center, because it's the problem of the United States. But also, you look at the United Kingdom, look at Europe. The problem is that the the radicals on both sides they gaining more and more power by dragging people out of the center. It's what I call the phenomenon of Spanish Civil War. When you have you know, it's the socialists, communists on one side, and fastest on another side, and somebody wants to stay in the middle. No, no, you must take like an A frame roof.

Eric Weinstein 1:29:37 Yeah. And the a frame is getting more and more peaked. It's so the idea is that only the most agile people can dance on

Garry Kasparov 1:29:44 American American, the two party system in America always, you know, served as the shield against radicalism. Right. One party went too far like rainwater. landslide, right. McGovern, left landslide, right. So right now you have elections potentially like race. What do you have a radical Yeah, and this is and there's so much room in the center. Now,

Eric Weinstein 1:30:03 do you have anyone that you like on the Democratic side?

Garry Kasparov 1:30:06 Look, again, this is a it's the way I look at this this elections is that it's all about defeating Donald Trump. So you have to make these elections about Donald Trump. You have to look for the best candidate who can win, you know, a win against Trump. Is

Eric Weinstein 1:30:18 that one thing who would that be? best chance of winning statistically,

Garry Kasparov 1:30:22 Amy Klobuchar, it's very clear, because she's she's exactly from the era where the elections will be decided in the Midwest. She wanted Minnesota 2018 re election by by by caring many districts that Trump won in 2000. All right, again, it's about winning elections.

Eric Weinstein 1:30:36 What do you think about if we get these candidates away from the typical CNN, MSNBC, NPR groups,

Garry Kasparov 1:30:43 it's Look, I'm you know, I used to be a chess player. And it's and it's the selection, but it but I always, you know, knew that learn from my mother. It's not just about winning. It's about making the difference. But this selection is about winning and saving the republic if Trump is reelected, yeah, it's the immediate consequences. cannot be any kind of predicted Neda will go bust, Trump will withdraw from Europe. And he will he will destroy

Eric Weinstein 1:31:06 every foundation. Well, the game theory of him not worrying about reelection. We have no idea what that looks like. Absolutely. So what's the so that by the way, you have to know that a lot of my my audience is split. A lot of them put up with my anti Trump stuff. Because they believe that I'm at least trying in good faith. Right. I don't always understand how they look at this. And they say that this is normal. I don't

Garry Kasparov 1:31:30 get it. I just see. It's just you know, the Trump's ability to corrupt others, you know, this. I mean, look at Attorney General. Yeah. Attorney General. Now it sounds like ideological warrior, right. when when when Attorney General uses words the left or right, he talks about left in other words, violating the law. That's it, you know, that's, it's Trump succeeded already in three years, you know, by destroying you know, what was left of American image abroad. And also in the country. We don't

Eric Weinstein 1:31:57 have a shared idea of what where we are What's going on and what's relevant? We just don't

Garry Kasparov 1:32:02 that's why Yes, it's about restoration. And that's why you need to make sure that Trump is defeated and this idea that it's money and you cannot have a candidate that coming up with it was there was a very

Eric Weinstein 1:32:13 big idea but it can only be defeating Trump. I'll just be honest with you, if the if the left of the United States does not stop with its propaganda stick bullshit, there's no way we're going to be able to put things back

Garry Kasparov 1:32:26 together again, not you cannot come up with a big socialist ideas because that's, that's Trump's only hope. No kidding. Praying, you know, for Sanders were more

Eric Weinstein 1:32:35 also the question of denying things like if somebody shoots up

Garry Kasparov 1:32:40 a parade route or something and shouts Allah Hu Akbar, at the end, there will be a democratic attempt to not talk about what the basis once again, this is going back to the question. So I want to hear I want to hear what they say about foreign policy. Because Trump is beat Trump was on trial. Now he will be impeached in the house for his you know, For these crimes, you know, for foreign wars related crimes, right? And they don't talk about it is they talk about something else. So the country, they want the country to believe that Trump was guilty, but we don't hear what would be what would they do different, right.

Eric Weinstein 1:33:13 But if the democrats, for example, pursue things with Trump actually isn't guilty, somebody who's both guilty and not guilty of things that he's accused of any attempt to prosecute things frivolously, which we will see right is going to result in this loss of trust. We have to do something about trust. And if we don't have some,

Garry Kasparov 1:33:32 yeah, bingo. I mean, it's a must trust. Trust is important.

Eric Weinstein 1:33:35 Gary, you got to come back to Los Angeles. Thank you so much for coming.

Garry Kasparov 1:33:38 It is there's more to talk about, you know, capitalism, social and the rest of the world.

Eric Weinstein 1:33:43 my bladder can go on forever. It is now 530, which is your status. So I'm just trying to take care of you. You'll come back to the portals, I guess. Absolutely. Fantastic. Okay. That's frozen. It varies activity at you been through the portal with the inimitable Garry Kasparov. It's been an incredible journey. Gary, thank you for visiting us. Take care, be well. Please subscribe to the podcast wherever you listen to podcasts on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, what have you and go over to YouTube and make sure you find our channel, click the subscribe button and the bell to be notified when our next episode drops. Thank you very much.