Trump 2.0, DOGE, and America's Global Decline with Sam Harris and Jonah Goldberg
What this covers
This is a preview of the full episode. In order to watch the entire episode and gain access to all full-length episodes of the Making Sense podcast, you can SUBSCRIBE at https://samharris.org/subscribe/ OR become a channel member to access episodes on YouTube. For those who can't afford the full subscription price, we offer full and partial scholarships: https://www.samharris.org/subscribe/scholarship
Sam Harris speaks with Jonah Goldberg about the damage Trump is doing domestically and abroad. They discuss Trump’s tariffs, Curtis Yarvin and the Tech Right, threats against Republicans who criticize Trump, why the arguments Republicans are using to defend Trump’s position on Ukraine are flawed, America’s deteriorating moral standing on the global stage, the recklessness of DOGE, why so many CEOs bent the knee to Trump, antisemitism on the Right, Trump’s plan for Gaza, worst case scenarios for Trump 2.0, and other topics.
Jonah Goldberg is the co-founder and Editor-in-Chief of The Dispatch. A Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, Goldberg is also an LA Times columnist, CNN contributor, and three-time bestselling author.
Website: TheDispatch.com
X: @JonahDispatch
Source description (no synthesized summary yet).
Goldberg argues that Trump 2.0 represents a fundamentally different and more dangerous scenario than his first term because Trump is now surrounded by loyalists rather than institutional guardrails, and his transactional, mob-boss approach to governance—combined with the corruption of tech oligarchs and abandonment of democratic allies—threatens both American credibility and democratic norms in ways that cannot be rationalized by reasonable foreign policy arguments.
- Trump's first term was constrained by 'Normie Republicans' who pushed back; Trump 2.0 has only loyalists who implement whatever he wants
- Trump's foreign policy is based on protection racket mentality (NATO as mob tribute) rather than defensible strategic reasoning, as shown by his treatment of Ukraine and allies
- Intellectual defenders of Trump's policies are engaging in goalpost-moving rationalization rather than honest assessment, which corrupts the epistemic environment and removes checks on bad decisions
This asset isn't compiled yet
You're seeing its claims, ranked. Compile it to build the argument threads, weight them, and check each claim against your library — the full view.
Breaking commitments to allies, betraying their trust, and conducting foreign policy based on extracting maximum profit undermines America's ability to maintain the US dollar as world reserve currency, because European and Japanese allies only accept dollar dominance because they're allies in our international order.
“if you want America to remain you want the US dollar to remain the world's Reserve currency pissing off basically all the other rich friends we have um is not a way to do that I mean China doesn't want the dollar to be the reserve currency Europeans and the Japanese they go along with it because they're our allies and they're part of the international order we created when we tell them you can't trust us that we are going to look for maximizing literally maximizing profit over your misfortunes the idea that you're going to get them to cooperate and all cooperate in all these other institutions is just not is is fantasy”
Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in the 1990s in exchange for security guarantees from the U.S., Russia, and others (the Budapest Memorandum), so the lesson now being taught to other nations is that nuclear disarmament leads to vulnerability and invasion.
“Ukraine is is a country that we convince to give up its nukes I mean one unfortunate lesson of this whole episode is that you know no one can look at this and think it was a good idea to give up your nukes uh because this is what happens to you”
Tariffs are historically the biggest driver of political corruption because every interest group seeks either an exemption from tariffs or to have their competitors tariffed, creating a system of special pleading and favor-dispensing that enables corrupt governance.
“one of the attractions that people don't seem to really understand why Trump loves tariffs so much is that historically tariffs are the biggest driver of political corruption because every single interest goes hat in hand and either asks for an exemption to tariffs or asks that their their competition get tariffed it is a way to beseech those in power for special pleading”
Trump's first term was constrained by 'Normie Republicans' who warned him off bad decisions and narrowed his scope of options, whereas Trump 2.0 is surrounded entirely by absolute loyalists whose mission is to enact whatever Trump wants rather than push back on it.
“the first term whatever successes there were were largely the result of the fact that Trump didn't know what he was doing and was constrained by more sort of Normie Republicans yeah who narrowed his scope of options and warned him off bad things”
The enemies of liberal democracy have long argued that all of America's ideals about supporting democracies are cover for raw power, and Trump's rapid embrace of purely transactional, extractive foreign policy has now validated that authoritarian critique of American principles.
“for years for as long as we've been alive virtually the enemies of democracy and now you know Putin is you know exhibit a in that cast of characters have been trying to advance the claim that all all of our ideals you know wanting to support the liberal Democratic order because it's a good thing it's better than the Alternatives all of that is right there there really are no deeper ethical principles that govern the the the relationships among nations there's just raw power there's just there's just bullly bullies and aspiring bullies and um Trump in you know a few short weeks seems to have fully ratified that view”
Realistic foreign policy must recognize that national honor and keeping commitments to allies have real material consequences for future cooperation, and that betraying allies undermines the credibility that keeps the US dollar as the world's reserve currency.
“it is a fact of of realism rightly understood that National honor matters that we've made commitments to allies that um that when we betray those allies when we betray our commitments when we break our word that has consequences for us going forward in all sorts of ways and um it if you if you want America to remain you want the US dollar to remain the world's Reserve currency pissing off basically all the other rich friends we have um is not a way to do that”
Trump has brought new voters to the Republican Party who are populist-nationalists rather than conservative in the William F. Buckley sense, which has changed the party's composition and what politicians encounter at Republican events.
“Trump has brought in all sorts of new voters to the party who um aren't conservative you can call them right-wing but they're much more populist nationalists than they are anything like you know the William F. Buckley conservatism I grew up in”
True realism in foreign policy requires understanding that national honor, honoring commitments to allies, and maintaining credibility have real consequences for future cooperation, currency strength, and geopolitical standing, not just ideological value.
“it is a fact of of realism rightly understood that National honor matters that we've made commitments to allies that um that when we betray those allies when we betray our commitments when we break our word that has consequences for us going forward in all sorts of ways and um it if you if you want America to remain you want the US dollar to remain the world's Reserve currency pissing off basically all the other rich friends we have um is not a way to do that”
Some Republican Senators who agree with normie positions on Ukraine and other issues do not speak up because they fear losing a primary or being physically threatened, creating a climate where Courage is punished and silence appears to be consent.
“I've talked to Republican Senators who I think are who agree with us very you know broadly and actually narrowly on all of these sorts of issues when it comes to Ukraine and a lot of other things but they're like look I'll I'll lose a primary um I there are only so many fights I can take um some of them are legitimately this gets under reported but there are there are rep Republicans who are elected Republicans who are literally afraid for their personal safety”
Surrounding yourself only with people who think every stupid idea is brilliant prevents anyone from having the political courage or muscle to tell the president he is wrong, which is dangerous for good governance.
“if you surround yourself only with people who think every brain fart is brilliant when you actually do something stupid or wrong um that's very scary because no one's going to have the courage or the political muscle to say Mr President back off on that”
Trump demanded that Ukraine provide the US with mineral rights and a profit from the Ukraine-Russia war during the Oval Office meeting six days prior to this conversation, and hectored Zelensky for not dressing appropriately and expressing sufficient obsequious gratitude.
“Trump and Vance Walts in there and start demanding uh you know mineral mineral rights and even a a prophet on the war and then you know Hector him for not uh you know dressing appropriately and saying thank you obsequiously enough”
When people are surrounded only by yes-men who treat every statement as brilliant (even obvious brain farts and typos), they lose the ability to receive critical feedback and make course corrections, and no one has the courage or political muscle to tell them they're wrong about something important.
“if you surround yourself only with people who think every brain fart is brilliant when you actually do something stupid or wrong um that's very scary because no one's going to have the courage or the political muscle to say Mr President back off on that”
Trump won the 2024 election with a margin of only 1.5-2 million votes in the popular vote and the 44th largest Electoral College win in American history, making it a narrow rather than landslide victory despite claims otherwise.
“it was the 44th biggest Electoral College win in American history right and he won the popular vote by what a one and a half 2 million votes or something like that so in the history of American politics it's a pretty narrow win”
Foreign policy realism as typically practiced is fundamentally a rhetorical trick—the best working definition of a realist is an ideologue who lost an argument, using empiricism as cover for ideological positions.
“I've long believed that realism is kind of nonsense it's basically the best working definition of a realist of a foreign policy realist is an ideologue who lost an argument it is a way it's a rhetorical trick of being able to say oh those ideologues are screwing things up and if you'd listen to me where I actually understand the facts and I have an empirical grasp on reality everything would be different”
The story of people clapping in Stalin's Gulag, where the first person to stop was killed and people kept clapping in pain for 20 minutes, illustrates the emotional temperament of the current Republican environment where no one dares stop applauding even when it becomes unbearable.
“there's a story of you know like like people clapping to the point of just excruciating pain like clapping continuously for 20 minutes and the first person who stops uh was actually killed right I mean that's that's uh yeah I mean and I mean and so again we're not there but that's the emotional temperament that we're kind of talking about”
Trump voters who supported him based on economic grievances (egg prices, inflation, border issues) did not vote for and do not endorse the boutique authoritarian moves like Cash Patel running the FBI or purges in the Justice Department, and Trump's assumption that he has a mandate for these moves represents a political miscalculation similar to Biden's.
“the guys who were voting on egg prices and inflation and maybe the Border weren't voting for cash Patel and Dan Bonino to run the FBI they weren't voting for purges in the justice department and to think that he's got the endorsement of the people even all of his voters for all that stuff I think is a political miscalculation”
The number of normie Republicans in Congress has shrunk over time because institutional Republicans who were there before 2017 have left, replaced by Trump-aligned candidates, following Yeats' principle that 'the best lack all conviction' and depart.
“just as a matter of just head counting the number of republicans in Congress who were there prior to 2017 has been shrinking and shrinking and shrinking right because a lot of the normies you know it's like like I don't want to quote Yates but like the best lacked all conviction and got the hell out of there and were replaced by the worst in a lot of cases”
Trump's first-term successes were largely the result of him not knowing what he was doing and being constrained by institutional Republicans who narrowed his scope of options and prevented him from pursuing worse policies, which many of his supporters misremembered as 'the good Trump term.'
“the first term whatever successes there were were largely the result of the fact that Trump didn't know what he was doing and was constrained by more sort of Normy Republicans yeah who narrowed his scope of options and warned him off bad things”
Among intellectuals and the overly-educated class who deal with words and concepts, there is a tendency when they make bad decisions to rationalize them by finding new reasons to convince themselves they were right, rather than admitting error.
“there is something that happens to people when they make bad decisions rather than own up to it and say my gosh I was wrong they say they look for new reasons to convince themselves first and then others that know in reality they were right and that's where the goalpost moving goes”
Trump's Ukraine deal demand for mineral rights and profit-sharing is consistent with his mob-boss model: he demanded not only security guarantees but that Ukraine give the U.S. 'a piece of the action' and 'get our money back plus' as if Ukraine owes him restitution.
“you look at the Ukraine deal where you know he's like no security guarantees but we need a piece of the action you know you need to give us a chunk of your resources um just to make us whole and in fact he said we're going to get our money back plus right so he wants to make a profit off of Ukraine”
Trump's and intellectuals' defenses of Trump's Ukraine policy as 'tough love for NATO' or 'pivoting to Asia' are pretextual rationalizations that do not describe Trump's actual goals, which are zero-sum and transactional rather than aimed at strengthening allies.
“the idea that Trump really wants NATO to become robust and strong is just nonsense right it's not it's not his goal he feels like he sees the world stage in this very zero some way he's a real estate guy and he thinks if if if if they win we lose that you know he thinks the EU was created he said it just the other day it was EU is created to screw America right um it's just it's a historical and um you can go down a long list of these kinds of arguments that are pretextual rationalizations for what Trump is actually doing”
Realism as a foreign policy doctrine is essentially 'the best working definition of a realist is an ideologue who lost an argument'—it is a rhetorical posture allowing ideologues to claim empirical grounding while being just as ideological as the positions they critique.
“the best working definition of a realist of a foreign policy realist is an ideologue who lost an argument it is a way it's a rhetorical trick of being able to say oh those ideologues are screwing things up and if you'd listen to me where I actually understand the facts and I have an empirical grasp on reality everything would be different”
Trump and the Republican Party have revealed that ideals of supporting liberal democracy, defending the international order, and leading the free world were not genuine commitments but merely rhetorical, which fundamentally changes how Americans and others see their own country.
“undermines um the country in all sorts of sort of you know sort of almost spiritual ways when you tell people that the best way to conduct foreign policy is to belittle your friends and allies and make friends with your enemies and to say that all that stuff about freedom and and and Liberty and leading the Free World that was all Bs and we don't care about that what Americans think about their own country starts to change”
Good Republicans have left office in part because the risk to their families' safety is not worth the tenth of what they could make in the private sector, illustrating that intimidation is effective at removing institutional opposition.
“there are a lot of decent people who were friends of mine who left in part because they're like why am I risking my family like literally my family's lives um for a tenth of what I can make in the private sector right”
Peter Thiel and tech oligarchs have concluded that oligarchy is inevitable and the rational strategy is to be oligarchs rather than oppose oligarchy, so they are backing Trump to secure their power and status.
“Peter teal I used to really admire a lot of Peter teal stuff I like the seasteading you know techno libertarian stuff let's get jetpacks all that kind of thing and I think that he basically and a bunch of people around him have decided that the country is going to be run by oligarchs that oligarchy is the future even though we really should call them plutocrats because oligarch just means rule of the few but um and if that's the way things are going better to be an oligarch than not”
JD Vance has built a political identity on far-right positions (endorsing industrial policy, praising Elizabeth Warren and Lena Khan, saying '10,000 cheap toasters isn't worth one American job') but when giving a big speech in Europe, he was a Reaganite free-market guy about AI and big tech while endorsing industrial policy for everything else, suggesting he is carrying water specifically for the tech oligarch constituency.
“JD Vance has been making a name for himself on the sort of on the farri for years endorsing industrial policy saying nice things about Lena Khan and Elizabeth Warren and all these things you know uh uh you know 10,000 cheap toasters isn't worth one American job and other economically illiterate stuff and yet when he gave his big speech in Europe about about regulation and free markets he was like a reaganite free market guy about Ai and big Tech but nothing else and to me that seems like okay he is carrying water for that constituency”
Forcing people to lie about basic facts (like who started the Ukraine war) is a Stalinist/Orwellian tactic that signals that truth will not save you and you cannot have the courage of your convictions, creating an environment that makes it easier for others to rationalize.
“you make them lie and um and then you kind of own them and so forcing people to lie about whether or not they think Russia started the war is just a way to signal that um truth will not save you right that that you cannot tell the truth you cannot have the courage of your convictions and speak honestly and that creates an environment that I think makes it easier for people the ones that are really frustrating you and I I know lots of people just like the ones you're describing to convince themselves right”
Trump's stripping of Secret Service protection from Mike Pompeo and other former officials who did not demonstrate perfect loyalty was done publicly and in effect announced a target on these individuals' backs, making them vulnerable to violence.
“it's not just that Trump susp got rid of the security protections he announced it to the world yeah he effect he effectively put a Target on these people's back and said you have a free shot now which is just despicable in all sorts of ways”
Trump's bullying of Israel into voting with the U.S. in the UN (against Israel's stated principles and interests in supporting scrappy democracies fighting aggression) was coercive and made Israel choose between abstract principles in its interest and immediate dependence on U.S. support.
“when we bullied Israel into voting with us in the UN where we voted with North Korea and China and Russia and all of that you know Israel has a vested deep and abiding National interest in maintaining the idea that the world should come to the aid of scrappy little democracies fighting for their survival yeah but when you force Israel to vote with us basically the pitch was yeah you got to put all that stuff aside because in reality you rely on us to keep you around and and so the Israelis were left with an impossible Choice be loyal to an abstract rhetorical principle that is in their interest or piss off an Administration that they desperately need help from right now”
Peter Thiel and Mark Andreessen have likely influenced JD Vance significantly, and if Vance becomes the future of the party, they will 'own' that outcome, as they have been instrumental in building Trump 2.0 and are influenced by thinkers like Curtis Yarvin.
“what do you make of the fact that people like Peter teal and Mark andrees and and all of these other uh people who have quite quite have been quite instrumental in in building Trump 2 know I mean they they they arguably introduce JD Vance to Trump and if if if uh Vance becomes the future of the party well then they they certainly will will largely own that”
Trump's approach to macroeconomics mirrors the approach to politics of a Brooklyn mobbed-up Democratic machine boss (whom Trump admired): punish enemies and reward friends, which is fundamentally different from stable governance or economic policy.
“one of the biggest influences on on Trump was this crooked Democratic machine mobbed up mob uh M party boss in Brooklyn and his whole approach to politics was punish you if you're an enemy and reward you if you're a friend um Trump's approach to macroeconomics is exactly that”
Ideals and moral principles have real causal efficacy in international relations; the realism vs. idealism debate is false because whether people trust you, admire you, and want to help you actually determines outcomes, making moral standing a hard power asset not a soft one.
“ideals and moral principles have real consequences so if your your realism has to embrace the the the causal efficacy of having people trust you having people admire you having people want to help you because you're the good guy you know you really are the it matters if you really are the good guys you know and because there really are bad guys out there”
Trump brought in new populist-nationalist voters to the Republican Party who are not conservative in the William F. Buckley sense, and long-time Republican politicians and donors found themselves at events surrounded by unfamiliar people who shared none of their ideological commitments.
“I can't tell you how many politicians I know who were totally freaked out when they started going to Republican events in the first term never mind now people who had been you know representing a district for for 10 terms 20 you know 20 years all of a sudden not recognizing anybody in the room because Trump has brought in all sorts of new voters to the party who um aren't conservative you can call them right-wing but they're much more populist nationalists than they are anything like you know the William F Buckley conservatism I grew up in”
Tariffs are historically the biggest driver of political corruption because every interest group seeks either exemptions from tariffs or tariffs on their competition, making tariffs a mechanism for extracting bribes and special pleadings, and this is why Trump loves tariffs.
“one of the attractions that people don't seem to really understand why Trump loves tariffs so much is that historically tariffs are the biggest driver of political corruption because every single interest goes hat in hand and either asks for an exemption to tariffs or asks that their their competition get tariffed it is a way to beseech those in power for special pleading and that I think is the that is the economic philosophy of this Administration”
The most concerning aspect of the Trump administration is not necessarily the immediate threat to liberty but the corruption of governance through special dealings, special pleadings, and corruption (like the meme coin and crypto corruption) that erode institutional integrity.
“the most dismaying stuff to me is not the threat necessary to Liberty right now although there are some things to be worried about it's just the corruption of it like the mem coin corruption the crypto corruption the the special dealings and special pleadings”
When Trump made a typo or silly tweet early in his first term, a turd-polishing Trump defender wrote an entire piece claiming Trump was actually sending a coded message to persecuted people of the Middle East using an Arabic-adjacent word, illustrating the absurdity of post-hoc rationalization.
“very early in his first term he butt tweeted something uh Kofi it was like just it was obviously just like a stupid typo butt tweet kind of thing and I made some jokes about it in the in a column or something and one of the WR I can't remember if it was the federalist or national greatness but one of those sort of turd polishing Trump is great in all things things wrote an entire piece condemning me for not understanding that it was possible that what Trump was really doing was tweeting a message to the persecuted people of the Middle East that he was on their side and that they should rise up because koffe is only a couple letters off of some word in Arabic”
Job interviews for government positions under Trump include loyalty test questions like 'Who won the 2020 election?' and 'Who were the real patriots on January 6?' designed to filter for people either willing to lie or deluded enough to believe the false answers.
“in an environment where everybody is told that the first test I mean like the job interviews for a lot of positions in government you are asked who won the um the 2020 election and if you answer wrong you don't get the job or you get fired you don't get promotion or whatever and if you answer wrong to the qu one of the other questions that's been reported was um who were the real Patriots on January 6 right”
When Trump misspoke and said Ukraine started the war, he could not take his foot out of his mouth and doubled down, forcing the Republican Party to 'insist that the emperor has clothes' and retroactively construct explanations for what he meant.
“Trump when Trump said that Ukraine started the war it's it was almost like he misspoke and he he couldn't and then he just couldn't take his foot out of his mouth and he just doubled down he doubled down on it and then everyone was forced to to insist that the emperor has close right”
Curtis Yarvin argues that the US needs a monarch, which Goldberg finds intellectually weak and specious, though he takes seriously that important people (like Peter Thiel) take Yarvin seriously.
“I listened to the New York Times interview with him and um to say I was underwhelmed by his arguments is a wild exaggeration um there's intellectually I think there's very little there there um not that everything he says is wrong I agree with some of his sort of subsidiary points I just don't think they back up his major conclusions that you know we need a monarch I think that's ridiculous um I think that so I don't take him very seriously I really don't”
Mike Pompeo and John Bolton both had their Secret Service protection stripped by Trump in what appears to be an intentional public message that refusing to be a loyalist will result in removal of security protection.
“I think bringing up the Pompeo security stuff John Bolton the others as well is is really worth just pausing on for a moment because it's not just that Trump susp got rid of the security protections he announced it to the world yeah he effect he effectively put a Target on these people's back and said you have a free shot now which is just despicable in all sorts of ways”
Russia and Putin have explicitly threatened the United States with nuclear annihilation for American support of Ukraine, and have been long-term explicit enemies of the US, making any alignment with Russia fundamentally not serving American interests regardless of stated rationale.
“Russia has you know Putin and uh you know his surrogates on Russian television have explicitly threatened us with nuclear Annihilation for our support of Ukraine right I me this is just these are these are not our friends uh to leave aside everything else they've been doing to to try to um undermine you know American democracy”
Trump won the 2024 election with a narrow popular vote margin of approximately 1.5 to 2 million votes and the 44th largest Electoral College win in American history, contradicting claims of a landslide mandate.
“it was the 44th biggest Electoral College win in American history right and he won the popular vote by what a one and a half 2 million votes or something like that so in the history of American politics it's a pretty narrow win”
Russia and Putin have been explicit enemies of the United States for a long time, have threatened the U.S. with nuclear annihilation over support for Ukraine, and have been undermining American democracy, so aligning with Russia is straightforwardly not in American interests.
“this uh alignment with Russia when Russia and you know and Putin himself have been explicit enemies of the United States for so long I mean Russ r Russia has you know Putin and uh you know his surrogates on Russian television have explicitly threatened us with nuclear Annihilation for our support of Ukraine right I me this is just these are these are not our friends”
Silence is taken as approval and consent in the Trump/MAGA ecosystem and Fox News environment, creating an incentive structure where breaking silence gets punished, and this mechanism of enforced silence allows myths to become accepted as truth.
“the way Fox operates the way you know the the most of the Maga Echo chamber operates and the Republican party now operates is that um silence is taken as approval and consent and you create an environment where breaking that silence gets punished”
If a Ukrainian is saying 'Trump doesn't speak for all of America, Americans are on our side,' but American politicians don't actually speak up and lend evidence to that hope, then the claim becomes false—silence turns the exception into the rule.
“if you don't speak up right if you don't actually lend actual evidence to that hope that that Trump doesn't speak for all of America if you just go along with it then it becomes true right”
Republican voters still show 60-70% favorable views of Ukraine while Russia polls at only 20%, indicating significant normie Republican opposition to Trump's Russia alignment exists but is suppressed by fear and online echo chambers.
“Ukraine is still like I looked at the numbers recently like 60 70% favorable views from Republican voters while Russia is like 20% it's some of this is a manifestation of being way too online and only listening to your biggest fans which is a form of corruption but um the the problem is is that well there are still significant numbers of normies they lack courage”
Trump in his second administration is surrounded entirely by absolute loyalists whose mission is to enact whatever Trump wants rather than push back on bad ideas or provide institutional constraint.
“he is surrounded himself entirely with absolute loyalists whose mission is to enact whatever Trump wants to do rather than push back on it rather than say Mr President that's a bad idea or you shouldn't do that it's all yes sir High kind of stuff and it's a mess”
Job interviews for Trump administration positions now include loyalty tests like 'Who won the 2020 election?' and 'Who were the real patriots on January 6?' with wrong answers resulting in disqualification or termination.
“in an environment where everybody is told that the first test I mean like the job interviews for a lot of positions in government you are asked who won the um the 2020 election and if you answer wrong you don't get the job or you get fired you don't get promotion or whatever and if you answer wrong to the qu one of the other questions that's been reported was um who were the real Patriots on January 6 right”
When Trump called Zelensky a dictator and Putin said he does not like to use that language lightly (two days later), this demonstrates Trump is not applying principles but using whatever insult is at hand as a tactical weapon, showing his criticism of dictators is empty rhetoric.
“when he calls delinsky a dictator he he doesn't actually care he doesn't in his in his own moral Universe he doesn't the dictator is an insult he just thinks that's the nearest weapon to hand that is usefully insulting against adversaries when he was asked if Putin was a dictator like two days later he says I don't like to use that I don't use that language lightly yeah it's just all nonsense right”
Being too online and only listening to your biggest fans is itself a form of corruption—it distorts reality perception and leads to bad decision-making.
“some of this is a manifestation of being way too online and only listening to your biggest fans which is a form of corruption”
The Trump administration's bullying of Israel into voting with the US, Russia, North Korea, and China in the UN (rather than allowing Israel to abstain) forced Israel to abandon a principle (supporting scrappy democracies) that is in Israel's strategic interest.
“when we bullied Israel into voting with us in the UN where we voted with North Korea and China and Russia and all of that you know Israel has a vested deep and abiding National interest in maintaining the idea that the world should come to the aid of scrappy little democracies fighting for their survival yeah but when you force Israel to vote with us basically the pitch was yeah you got to put all that stuff aside because in reality you rely on us to keep you around”
Trump does not take Curtis Yarvin seriously intellectually—his arguments are 'specious and sort of silly' with 'very little there there'—but takes it very seriously that important people like Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen take Yarvin seriously, which is deeply disturbing.
“I kind of ignored courtesy Arvin for years and then I listened to the New York Times interview with him and um to say I was underwhelmed by his arguments is a wild exaggeration um there's intellectually I think there's very little there there um not that everything he says is wrong I agree with some of his sort of subsidiary points I just don't think they back up his major conclusions that you know we need a monarch I think that's ridiculous”
Peter Thiel and tech oligarchs have concluded that oligarchy is inevitable and the future, so rather than resist it, they have decided it is better to be oligarchs than not, and have therefore aligned with Trump to ensure they retain power in an oligarchic system.
“I have a theory I got it from a friend of mine that you know Peter teal I used to really admire a lot of Peter teal stuff I like the seasteading you know techno libertarian stuff let's get jetpacks all that kind of thing and I think that he basically and a bunch of people around him have decided that the country is going to be run by oligarchs that oligarchy is the future even though we really should call them plutocrats because oligarch just means rule of the few but um and if that's the way things are going better to be an oligarch than not”
Goldberg was not allowed to criticize Trump on air at Fox News—not through explicit prohibition but through question selection: by never being asked about Trump (only about Nancy Pelosi, etc.), it appeared he was on board even though he was not lying, he was simply not given the opportunity to tell the truth.
“one of the reasons I ultimately left Fox was that I was basically not allowed to criticize Trump on air now no one told me that I was just never asked a question where I and know my my whole thing is I don't lie right you know you ask me a question and I'll answer honestly so if you only ask me questions about what I think of Nancy Pelosi and you never ask me what I think about Donald Trump it'll sound like I'm on board”
The tech billionaires influencing Trump 2.0 have read or are influenced by thinkers associated with figures like Curtis Yarvin, and some of those thinkers are actually or effectively Nazis, representing a dangerous radicalization of the tech billionaire class.
“they are really you know just they're not even hiding it they're quite influenced by yarvin and and and the the people he reads and some of the people he reads are actually Nazis”
The dynamic of forcing people to defend obviously false claims (like the Ukraine war origination) is similar to the Stalin-era joke about clapping continuously until someone stops, with the first person to stop clapping being killed—it establishes who has power through public demonstrations of ideological loyalty over truth.
“there's a dynamic there that old joke about how you never want to be the first person to stop clapping Stalin when Stalin enters the room right you know was that it might be apocryphal I don't know if it was uh Souls n or I think it's from the the gulag archipelago but there's a story of you know like like people clapping to the point of just excruciating pain like clapping continuously for 20 minutes and the first person who stops uh was actually killed right I mean that's that's uh yeah I mean and I mean and so again we're not there but that's the emotional temperament that we're kind of talking about”
The red-pilling of tech billionaires like Thiel, Andreessen, and others has been sociologically fascinating and deeply problematic, representing a shift from techno-libertarian idealism to authoritarian plutocracy.
“The red pilling of the sort of tech Bros has been um sociologically fascinating and I think really problematic”
The argument that Trump's first term was successful because 'the economy was great' conflates correlation with cause and relies on nostalgia that overlooks genuine harms, while treating the best-case scenario as the most likely scenario without accounting for changes in institutional constraints.
“the argument that you heard from everybody was the best case scenario was also the most likely scenario and the best case scenario for them was that it was going to be a repeat of the first Trump term which I thought they were overly nostalgic about and forgot a lot of things about the first Trump term”
JD Vance has been inconsistent on free market ideology: he opposes free markets for most industries (citing that '10,000 cheap toasters isn't worth one American job'), but in his Europe speech on AI and tech he adopted a free market Reagan-ite position, indicating he is protecting the interests of tech oligarchs while invoking industrial policy for others.
“JD Vance has been making a name for himself on the sort of on the farri for years endorsing industrial policy saying nice things about Lena Khan and Elizabeth Warren and all these things you know uh uh you know 10,000 cheap toasters isn't worth one American job and other economically illiterate stuff and yet when he gave his big speech in Europe about about regulation and free markets he was like a reaganite free market guy about Ai and big Tech but nothing else”
The charitable interpretation of Trump's Ukraine policy—that the US cannot fight multiple wars simultaneously and must triage commitments to focus on China—is intellectually defensible in the abstract but does not describe what Trump is actually doing, which is not aimed at making NATO stronger but rather sees the EU as created specifically to screw America.
“the case that you lay out that is a that is a on its face and intellectually defensible argument um it is uh you know foreign policy requires making governing is to govern is to choose right and in a world of scarce resources you put your resources where they are most needed for the the problems ahead and I get all of that my first problem with it as a defense of what Trump is doing is that it's not a defense of what Trump is doing”
Some decent Republicans have left politics in part because they were unwilling to risk their families' lives for political positions, especially when private sector compensation is better, making some of the political capitulation explainable through legitimate personal safety and economic concerns.
“there are a lot of decent people who were friends of mine who left in part because they're like why am I risking my family like literally my family's lives um for a tenth of what I can make in the private sector right”
Breaking America's word and commitments to allies, combined with treating America as purely transactional and extractive, undermines the American identity and character in ways that are 'almost spiritual,' regardless of immediate political or economic benefit.
“it's also just it's it's it's undermining I don't want to get to poetic but it undermines um the country in all sorts of sort of you know sort of almost spiritual ways when you tell people that the best way to conduct foreign policy is to belittle your friends and allies and make friends with your enemies and to say that all that stuff about freedom and and and Liberty and leading the Free World that was all Bs and we don't care about that what Americans think about their own country starts to change”
Trump administration hiring deliberately selects people who either lack integrity (willing to lie about basic facts) or are so deluded they actually believe the false answers, which is 'no way to actually run a government.'
“he wants a government full of people who either are so lacking in Integrity that they're willing to lie about those kinds of basic fundamental things or so diluted that they actually believe the cor correct quote unquote correct answers either way um it's just no way to actually run a government”
Ukraine still polls favorably (60-70%) among Republican voters while Russia polls unfavorably (20%), contradicting claims that Trump voters universally support his Russia-aligned policies.
“you know Ukraine is still like I looked at the numbers recently like 60 70% favorable views from Republican voters while Russia is like 20%”
The concept of a presidential 'mandate' is intellectually garbage—it's a rhetorical device that politicians use to justify whatever they want to do.
“I think the concept of a mandate is is garbage to begin with”
Intellectuals and pundits are engaging in goalpost-moving rationalization of Trump's policies in part because they want to remain relevant to the administration and have influence with decision-makers.
“this is one of the great frustrations I have in the the Trump era and and Neil Ferguson is a friend of mine so I'm not ascribing this necessarily to him um first of all this the goalpost moving you referenced at the very beginning of the conversation among your friends you know um there's a lot of that in the intellectual classes um in part because a lot of people want to be relevant to have influence in the administration to be part of the conversation”
Trump's approach to macroeconomics and foreign policy is based on a mob-boss framework: punish enemies and reward friends, as learned from Roy Cohn, a crooked Democratic machine/mob-connected party boss in Brooklyn.
“one of the biggest influences on on Trump was this crooked Democratic machine mobbed up mob uh M party boss in Brooklyn and his whole approach to politics was punish you if you're an enemy and reward you if you're a friend um Trump's approach to macroeconomics is exactly that”
Many Republican politicians and elected officials are literally afraid for their personal safety if they speak up against Trump, with death threats and security concerns cited as factors in some high-profile cases like Joni Ernst's opposition to Pete Hegseth.
“there are rep Republicans who are elected Republicans who are literally afraid for their personal safety yeah um you know with the Pete hegseth uh nomination you know uh Janie Ernst was one of the holdouts and there are a lot of there's a lot of talk about how like what she was put through the death threats and all of that were one of the things that tipped her over”
The 'red-pilling' of tech bros has been sociologically fascinating and problematic, with figures like Peter Thiel, Marc Andreessen, and others actively facilitating Trump's second administration and introducing JD Vance to Trump.
“the red pilling of the sort of tech Bros has been um sociologically fascinating and I think really problematic I have a theory I got it from a friend of mine that you know Peter teal I used to really admire a lot of Peter teal stuff”
Goldberg left Fox News because he was essentially not allowed to criticize Trump on air—not through explicit prohibition, but through only being asked questions about Democratic figures, creating an implicit understanding that Trump criticism would not be welcomed.
“one of the reasons I ultimately left Fox was that I was basically not allowed to criticize Trump on air now no one told me that I was just never asked a question where I and know my my whole thing is I don't lie right you know you ask me a question and I'll answer honestly so if you only ask me questions about what I think of Nancy Pelosi and you never ask me what I think about Donald Trump it'll sound like I'm on board”
When Trump called Zelensky a dictator and was asked days later if Putin was a dictator, he said 'I don't like to use that language, I don't use that language lightly,' showing that Trump's accusations are opportunistic insults rather than principled moral stances.
“when he calls delinsky a dictator he he doesn't actually care he doesn't in his in his own moral Universe he doesn't the dictator is an insult he just thinks that's the nearest weapon to hand that is usefully insulting against adversaries when he was asked if Putin was a dictator like two days later he says I don't like to use that I don't use that language lightly yeah it's just all nonsense right”
Ukraine is a democracy that was convinced to give up its nuclear weapons, and the current Russian invasion demonstrates that this was a catastrophic mistake, providing a negative lesson to other potential non-nuclear nations.
“Ukraine is is a country that we convince to give up its nukes I mean one unfortunate lesson of this whole episode is that you know no one can look at this and think it was a good idea to give up your nukes uh because this is what happens to you”
When Trump tweeted what appeared to be a typo ('butt' tweet), Trump apologists wrote entire pieces claiming it was an intentional coded message to Middle Eastern people, treating obviously stupid utterances as brilliant strategy to avoid acknowledging error or absurdity.
“very early in his first term he butt tweeted something uh Kofi it was like just it was obviously just like a stupid typo butt tweet kind of thing and I made some jokes about it in the in a column or something and one of the WR I can't remember if it was the federalist or national greatness but one of those sort of turd polishing Trump is great in all things things wrote an entire piece condemning me for not understanding that it was possible that what Trump was really doing was tweeting a message to the persecuted people of the Middle East that he was on their side”
Republicans do not need to say 'I was wrong about Trump and he's horrible,' they only need to say 'There are good guys and bad guys in this story,' which is a minimal test that would demonstrate Trump doesn't speak for all of America.
“they don't have to ne necessarily have to say I was wrong about Trump and he's a horrible person but they just have to say look there are good guys and bad guys in this story and the you know the tests are so small I mean it's something out of it's a very orwellian sort of stalinist kind of thing where you force people to lie”
Memoir coin, cryptocurrency speculation, and special-interest corruption (sweetheart deals for oligarchs) represent the economic corruption at the heart of the Trump administration, more disturbing to Goldberg than the direct threats to liberty.
“the the most dismaying stuff to me is not the threat necessary to Liberty right now although there are some things to be worried about it's just the corruption of it like the mem coin corruption the crypto corruption the the special dealings and special pleadings”
Trump's core supporters—Hispanic mechanics, working-class voters concerned with COVID, inflation, and the border—did not vote for authoritarian moves like Cash Patel running the FBI or January 6 pardons, and polling shows the January 6 pardons are unpopular even among his supporters, indicating Trump is overestimating his mandate.
“his pardoning which I thought by itself was an impeachable act on his first day um his pardoning of the January 6 rioters is not popular it's just not polling well”
When Trump said 'Ukraine started the war,' it appeared to be a misspoken remark ('you've been fighting for three years, you shouldn't have started it'), but once uttered, he and the Republican Party had to double down on it and insist 'the emperor has clothes,' forcing a complete epistemological distortion.
“Trump when Trump said that Ukraine started the war it's it was almost like he misspoke and he he couldn't and then he just couldn't take his foot out of his mouth and he just doubled down he doubled down on it and then everyone was forced to to insist that the emperor has close right after that but it's like it's like he actually wasn't making the claim in any kind of straightforward way that that no history is is other than you think it is Ukraine actually started the war he was just started he was sort of riffing he was saying you had you've been you've been fighting for three years you shouldn't you should have put an end to it you shouldn't have started it and he sort of blurted out the phrase you shouldn't have started it and was anchored to it”
Germany has been rearming in response to Trump's NATO pressure, and Britain has been 'negligent' in its national security spending and policy, suggesting that Europe may be forced into stronger self-defense despite Trump's undermining of NATO.
“I think that uh it is good that Europe is rearming and or apparently is rearming I think it's good that Germany is is doing this I think Britain has been negligent in all sorts of ways about its National Security”
Goldberg disregarded Curtis Yarvin's arguments for years but found them upon closer examination (via a New York Times interview) to be intellectually thin and specious, failing to adequately support Yarvin's major conclusion that a monarchy is necessary.
“I kind of ignored courtesy Arvin for years and then I listened to the New York Times interview with him and um to say I was underwhelmed by his arguments is a wild exaggeration um there's intellectually I think there's very little there there um not that everything he says is wrong I agree with some of his sort of subsidiary points I just don't think they back up his major conclusions that you know we need a monarch I think that's ridiculous”
It's a positive development that Europe is rearming and Germany is increasing military spending, but Trump's approach doesn't drive that outcome—it happens despite his behavior, not because of it.
“I think that uh it is good that Europe is rearming and or apparently is rearming I think it's good that Germany is is doing this”
Goldberg did not vote for Trump in 2024 but also did not vote for Kamala Harris, citing that he lives in DC where his vote wouldn't matter, but he argued with Trump-voting friends that their optimistic scenario was wrong.
“in the waning days of the election I had arguments with a lot of friends of mine and they are friends who were going to vote against KLA Harris for Donald Trump and I I thought their calculations were wrong I didn't vote for Harris but I was certainly not going to votee for Donald Trump um but I also live in Washington DC so I didn't think my vote mattered all that much”
Goldberg's podcast is called 'The Remnant,' suggesting his positioning as part of a smaller group that has preserved certain values or principles against mainstream trends.
“there's a reason why my podcast is called The Remnant for you know”
The interviewer is concerned that there may not be many 'closeted normies' left in the Republican Party—people who privately hold traditionally conservative views but feel unable to express them publicly.
“let's let's talk about this how many closeted normies do you think there are because I'm starting to worry that there are not that many”
Trump supporters originally told Goldberg that the best case scenario (good economy, few major incidents) was also the most likely scenario, but Goldberg was right that this was wishful thinking given changed circumstances in Trump 2.0.
“I had arguments with a lot of friends of mine and they are friends who were going to vote against KLA Harris for Donald Trump and I I thought their calculations were wrong um but the argument that you heard from everybody was the best case scenario was also the most likely scenario”