Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
National Press Club -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) This program is live captioned by Ericsson Access Services. Today at the National Press Club, journalist P.J.
American political satirist and journalist P.J. O'Rourke. Fresh from the US campaign trial, he has described Donald Trump as a flying monkey and Hillary Clinton as the second-worst thing that could happen to America. P.J. O'Rourke with today's National Press Club address.

Well, good afternoon, and welcome to the National Press Club and today's Westpac address. I'm Chris Uhlmann. Our guest today is the preimminent political satirist from the United States P.J. O'Rourke. I vividly remember the first essay of his that I'd read some time in the 1980s, because of the unforgettable title, which was How To Drive Fast On Drugs While Getting Your Wing-wang Squeezed And Not Spill Your Drink. Here was, I thought, a man with something to say, so I bought every book thereafter. He brings wit and insight into his view of international politics and international affairs. He is here to deliver speeches in Melbourne on August 9 and he is heading to Byron Bay for the Writers festival. He is a busy man but he has stopped by to speak to us. We're delighted to him here. (CHEERING AND APPLAUSE) Well, as was mentioned, I have just come from America or, as I call it, Australia with 275 million fewer idiots.(LAUGHS) More idiots. Excuse me, I have my maths quite wrong. Two very similar Irish
countries. Basically, a bunch of Irish with premature Brexits. We all got thrown - 'all', there a few immigrant folk here - but most of us got thrown out of the British Isles. You were shipped to Australia as convicts. We got shipped to America as ballast. Never have liked the Brits, really. A bunch of bed-wetters. Here we are in a period of absolute global lunacy and the Brits are not even crazy enough to elect Boris Johnson as Prime Minister. Making him Foreign Minister is certainly sticking it to the foreigners. You people on the other hand - five prime ministers in six years. You really know how to throw the bastards out. But then you keep letting them back in! Turnbull and Shorten, it looks like they were stuck in the revolving there for just a minute. A hung Parliament - what a temptation that must have been. I suppose it's morally wrong to hang members of parliament, and probably illegal too, except in parts of Queensland if they're caught bothering sheep.(LAUGHS) But I have to say, for an outsider, Australian politics are a little odd. I mean, you've got Malcolm. A Liberal Party fellow with Labor Party views on climate change, same-sex marriage and getting the Queen off your stamps. Then you have Shorten who intends to make Australia fair or middling, or so-so, or ho-hum. My eye was caught by Barnaby Joyce wanting to kill Johnny Depp and Amber Heard's dogs. Now, if I am reading the latest issue of OK magazine correct, that is an improvement over what else is going on in the Depp household. The Green Party, wanting to save nature. You have the Nick Xenophon Team - am I saying that right - running on a platform of policies that favour Nick Xenophon. On the other side of the coin you have xenophobia - Jacqui Lambie, Pauline Hanson, kind of Donald Trump's in (LAUGHTER)
the transgender bathroom. But, you see, Australia's politics are merely neurotic. In America, we are fully insane. We have gone completely around the bend. Our national motto is now 'WTF'. We started out with but 600 candidates for president. And who were these jacklegs, these highbinders, these swellheads, floor flushers and animated spatoons thinking they were worthy of America's highest office. Did they take American voters for fools? Of course they did. But were they also deluded, deranged, were they receiving radio broadcasts on their teeth fillings telling them that they were capable of being president? After a while, we managed to narrow the field down to five. Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Now, Cruz, Kasich, Sanders and Clinton and Trump, that is not a list of presidential candidates but the worst law firm in the world. That is a law firm that couldn't get Catlin Jenner off on a charge of Bruce Jenner identity theft! I mean, has the office of the American Presidency diminished in stature until it attracts only the leprekorns of political life or must you be taller than the clown to run for president? It wasn't just the candidates who were looney. The electorate was nuts. The 2016 presidential campaign has been the most severe case of American mass psychosis since our Salem witch trials in 1692. In fact, it has been worse than that. What kind of witch-hunt leaves Hillary not dunked in the pond or pressed under heavy stones? Back when all this started out, when the American presidential election campaign began, it looked as if to candidates, the two in -- the two inevitable candidates would be brother of George W. Bush, son of George HW Bush, Jeb, and hill -- Hillary. I trembled for my country. Voters would go to the ballot-box and see the names Bush and Clinton and think, "Gosh I am getting forgetful." A shuttle from the local old age home would send a few senile voters, some from skid row and we would have the first president of the United States elected by drunks. What happened to Jeb Bush? He is young for a Republican, a successful businessman for a Bush, and he was the former Governor of Florida, where balancing corruption and state are vital for the Republican Party plus he was rolling like a dirty dog in campaign contributions. But something went wrong and we don't know what. We American political reporters we are, frankly, puzzled. The Bushes are an old aristocratic family, with all the brains that that implies. Perhaps Jeb just wandered away from the campaign stump and couldn't find his way back. Then it turns out that even Hillary Clinton did not have a lock on her nomination as her fellow Bernie Sanders, the screwy, commander of the Vermont Comm, Donald Trump for people living in their parents' basement. Bernie is a socialist - says so himself. I realised that in announcing you're a socialist does not seem as bizarre in Australia as it seems in America. You have a long tradition of mainstream socialism. We do not. In America, say that you're a socialist is like saying that you flipped through the 10 Commandments and you've decided to cross out, "Thou shalt not steal." When Bernie says he is a socialist, Americans hear, "I am going to swipe your flat TV screen and give it to people living in the back streets of Vermont." Bernie says he wants to make more like Europe. Oh, good idea. Europe has had a swell traffic record for 100 years now. I mean, make America more like Europe - where do you even go to get all the Nazis and Co mmies and 90 million dead people that would Europe.
take to make America more like That was Bernie. Then over there was Ted Cruz. Cruz had one thing going for him manage primary prng voters -- Republican voters. Ted Cruz is 161 years younger than Hillary Clinton in dog years. Dogs was
are all we had this selection so it was a fair measure. But Cruz seemed a little clueless on foreign policy. Wanted to carpet-bomb ISIS. I don't think that would work. Didn't they pretty much invent the carpet...Cruz marijuana.
opposed the legalisation of marijuana. I have teenage daughters. I worry. And marijuana is a drug that makes teenage boys drive slow.(LAUGHTER) Ted opposed abortion. As I said, I've got teenage daughters. If abortion laws need tweaking, it's this - the woman gets to decide what to do with the baby and I get to decide what to do with the boyfriend. And Ted was opposed to immigration. No, Ted, no. I am 68 years old, what am I supposed to do - raise my own children? Cruz is a cultural conservative. Cruz is still fighting the culture war. Up there on the frontline bravely fighting away not noticing the other side has gone home to side -- to celebrate victory. If you were wondering with what is going on with the American Republican Party, and who is not, John Kasich was the fellow you would have been wondering about. Kasich, a very conservative but also a very popular Governor of the State of Ohio. Ohio, is smack, dab, in the middle of the United States. It is a swing state or, as we say in American, a purple state, as purple as Barney the Dinosaur. Ohio is a microcosm of hatered, you name it, they all hate each other - but they don't all hate John Kasich. He was re-elected by a landslide as governor. Before that, he served 9 terms in US Congress. 18 years on the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, six years as Committee.
Chairman of the House Budget Committee. No wonder he could not win a primary any place except his own darned state because the Republican Party was in no damned mood for a popular, experienced politician with broad popular appeal. John Kasich - that is a two-word Republican suicide note. So we wound up with Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton. Now, Hillary carries more baggage than a Boeing she used as Secretary of State visiting every country that later blew up in her face in her quest to fulfil the mission of the US Secretary of State, which is to accumulate frequent flyer miles. On the upside, she is familiar with the White House, knows where the extra toilet paper is stored and where the spare key to the nuke missile launch is missing, it is the Truman ball -- balcony, second pillar from the left. So I am supporting Donald Trump. I am supporting Donald Trump because of something that the great HL Mekins said. He said democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard. (LAUGHTER) Trump's chief domestic policy goal is to be on TV. As President, Trump will get to be on TV all the time, 24/7. Might not be such a bad thing because just spraying his hair during commercial breaks will keep Trump too busy to push any other bird-brained domestic policy goals. This will make for a healthy turnover in Trump Cabinet appointees such as Ivanka Trump, Dennis Rodman. Plus he understands American's economy. America's household debt is now more than $225,000. Now,

$3.5 billion of his business debt and $900 million of his personal debt. That being the Trump way of saying that he didn't pay it. We, Americans, know a leader when we see one. Then imagine Trump's foreign policy. Here is a guy who is under times
the illusion that he is about 10 times richer than he actually is, who believes President Obama was born in Kakjakast an to the Queen of Sheba. Rub, China, Iran, Iraq, the Taliban and ISIS will be paralysed with fear - what he will do? Well, he will build hundreds of casinos, which will then all go bankrupt. Trump will leave Russia trying to palm off Eastern Ukraine on angry bond holders and China auctioning distressed property in the Spratly Islands. This might just work! It won't. It won't. I know, we members of the press, we are supposed to maintain a certain political neuralty, I suppose. Frankly, I have never been any good at this in the best of times, you know. But I honour the underlying principle of being fair and balanced, so to speak, you know. However, there comes a time when decent human beings, and political reporters too, have to choose sides. They have to choose sides. And, in fact, actually, I endorse Hillary Clinton for President. Because, as was mentioned, she is the second-worst thing that could happen to America. I endorse her and all her pomps and all her empty promises. Better the devil that you know than the landlord of the flies on his own 757 flying to and fro in the earth with gold-plated seatbelt buckles, talking bigoted, rude and vulgar crap. The electorate is possessed by a demon, two if you count Bernie Sanders. And so, I endorse Hillary. I mean, even though in the Wizard of Oz, Dorothy and Toto's house fell on Hillary, you know, the Munchkins endorse Hillary. Trump is a flying monkey except that the flying monkey section when they go... That makes sense compared to Trump's policy statement. It is not that Hillary makes much sense everything!
either. I mean, she is wrong about everything! I mean, she is to politics and state craft what Pope the 8th in the Inquisition were to Galileeo. She thinks the sun resolves her. But Trump, Trump Earth - trademark - it is flat. It is flat. Will sail over the edge. Better a nit of a wit than a louse. Better a mangy cat than a rabid dog. Better to root out the garden of free enterprise with the democratic pigs than to run off the protection cliff with the swine Republicans. Every since Athens in the 5th century BC, the great enemy of democracy has been the demigod. Now we have a firebrand soap box order who cannot so much put a coherent sentence together. He can't do it. He likes to talk bigly, you know. So here is to you, Hillary, for saving your best bloviation to highly paid speeches to social bankers. I would, if I could, pay Trump even more to shut up. Hillary, you have the crone in crony capitalism and I endorse you. I choose Goldman Sachs milk car over the creten bore siring the pigs.

Let me tell you why Hillary is a great presidential candidate. By comparison.(LAUGHTER) And don't rush me here. Did I mention she is the second-worst thing? Yeah. She doesn't cheat at golf. Because I know. Yeah, the Clinton Foundation is an ugly mess of American policy -- foreign policy meddling. It is true, Hillary screwed up during the attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi z -- as opposed to Trump who would sent his supporters to boo and hiss and then ask the police to take them away. And, yes, Hillary Clinton sent top secret State Department to her Emil -- email, but this shows she can keep a secret. Trump would have told the top secret documents on ebail and also released the NSA tell Hillary secrets. I mean, who would tell a secret to Donald Trump? So, that's the state of things in the United States. Like I said, or I meant to say in my fumbling jetlagged way, Australia with 275 million more idiots. So, questions? Indeed. We will go to questions from the floor.OK.(APPLAUSE)

We will begin with Australian Associated Press.In your heart of hearts, who do you think will actually win?OK. Who do I think will win? You know, I don't want to jinx things. I have been so wrong for so long about this, for two years I've been absolutely wrong about everything that happened in this campaign. On paper, Hillary Clinton has to win. Of course, on paper Donald Trump couldn't get nominated. So, I mean, Hillary Clinton has the math. Women support her. Minorities support her. Younger voters support her. A larger number of voters support Hillary Clinton. The only problem with this larger number of voters is that these are groups that are famous for not voting. Whereas Trump's people will get their walkers and their little electric things - you know what I mean? Through 50 inches of slush in November they will make it to the polls. This makes it very hard to predict. But, I mean, really, it should not be that difficult for Hillary to win. But the thing is, you know, I don't need to tell you that the most amazing thing about the selection is the negatives - the negatives on the candidates. The last time I looked a couple of days before a I left the United States, the negatives were running for Trump at very close to 70%. But the thing here is Clinton was only 3.6% behind him in the negatives. So, you know, he just has to be...she has to hope that he's 3.6% more detestable than she is.(LAUGHTER) Radio 2WC.Mr O'Rourke welcome to Australia, it is great to have you. Thank you.I note that you're a panelist on a radio program on the United States called Wait, Wait, Don't Tell me.I am. Yes.What I would like you to tell me is wouldn't the world be a safer place May
if Hillary Clinton joined Theresa May in the UK and Angela Merkel as female leaders of very important nations and would the Russians and the Chinese be then playing catch-up? Our Foreign Minister Julie Bishop is the equivalent of your Secretary of State and he said on International Women's Day said that the world's greatest asset are women. So, therefore, wouldn't the world and America be a safer place with President Hillary Clinton? Your view on that.Oh, there is no doubt about that. But I don't think it has that much to do with women. I mean, this is not, you know, Ladies Detective Club. I mean, women, you know, May was no basket of warm puppies, no doubt about that. We have experienced with Mao's wife there and the Gang of Four kind of stuff. Human evil is not limited by gender, would that it were. With Hillary, yes, the world would be safer because as far as I'm concerned, Hillary is wrong about everything, but she is wrong wrong.
within the known parameters of wrong.(LAUGHTER) This is wrong, we have experienced it before, we're used to wrong, we're prepared for it. What Trump has is that element of, I don't know what you call it on your stock exchange, we have something called the volatility index, you probably have something like it. The VIX. It is just too high on Trump. You just don't know what he is going to do. He might turn out to be a harmless buffer, stumbling around, not knowing where to go or what to do, taking advice from grown-ups. Nothing is impossible. But, you know what, what wants to take that chance? We know what Hillary will do, it is not going to be very good, but it will be adequate. And no surprise. Actually, I wanted to share one thing with you. I was at one of those Washington dinners where everybody in Washington gets together and congratulates themselves for being at one of those Washington dinners. (LAUGHTER) I wound up next to a military guy, a big military guy, a military guy with, like, I mean, all kinds of shiny stuff on their shoulders, some rank beyond my civilian knowing. We were chatting. I was just saying, I forget what point of the silly campaign it was, but I was saying, "Well, it looks pretty sure that Hillary will get the nomination and my guess is that she'll be president." And he said, "I hope so." I was really surprised because American military men are famous for never saying anything political. I mean, they tend to, when they even cross that line, like General McCrystal, out they go. I was very surprised, he could see I was surprised. He said, "Look, on the subject of surprises, that's the business we're in." 'We're', meaning the Pentagon. Is, "No surprises. We don't want any surprises." I was very shocked to hear him say it. He went on. He said, "Somebody might get elected president, make I like them, maybe I don't, but we just can't have any surprises
surprises." And this guy is all surprises - none of them good, so far. The Canberra Times.Nick Stewart, the Canberra Times. I've loved your writing for years, the sharp eye. Thank you.The keen cynicism. Has No.
America finally listened to you? No.(LAUGHTER) Are they just so cynical that they can't actually believe in a good politician anymore? Has this, in spirit?
some way, corroded the public spirit? Why is it that America, that at one stage we used to look to as the leader of the world, is now now not wanting that? -- is now not wanting that? Is it also a reflection of turmoil within in terms of people not being paid for fair amounts of work for the incredible disparity of wealth that you have and that we're following on with?Well, I wouldn't...I think what we're seeing worldwide, we're seeing a period of political dislocation. Which is not good news for sensible politics. It has a bunch of factors. We could probably stand here and list all the factors all day. Wage disparity might be one of them. I don't think that...we in America don't really give a damn about it that much except that for two-thirds of the If
country, are wages aren't going up. If our wages were going up, it wouldn't matter how rich the guy down the road was, but they aren't. We are seeing a period of extremely rapid change, technologically, economically, it is making people uncomfortable and worrying people, even the people it is benefitting. My children benefit from this but they don't see what the clear...I was talking to my 18-year-old, she doesn't see a clear path for herself in terms of a career. She doesn't really know. Everything is changing so fast. That is, you know, extremely disturbing. This mess in the Middle East, which is set loose, I mean, we already had a situation where there was a lot of immigration around the world, most of it, sort of, economically-based but it is ultimately always political because what makes people poor is first and foremost bad governance. It was ultimately political. It was upsetting people already, the way it upsets people in the United States. And then what happens in the Middle East unleashes this problem on Europe that is horrific. I mean, and why Brexit? Why Brexit? Not because the EU cheese-naming regulations or the fact that the Brits wouldn't get their mattresses measured in inches, had to measure them in centimetres, it was immigration. They looked at Europe and saw what was happening and said, "We're next unless we get out of here!" It was that simple. People are really stressed around the world and a promise of post-1989 promise of return to democracy in places like Russia, we know where that went, you know. We know where Tiananmen Square went. And people are just worried, and a worried electorate is not a wise electorate. It is not thinking about sensible stuff. We may have thought at the time that the political arguments of the '80s and the '90s and the '00s, Bill Clinton's, you know, being indicted and impeached for fooling around with the nutty intern, we may have thought that was all...that stuff looks deeply serious compared to what's going on now. That looks like that has about
gravitas, you know! We were talking about ideas back then that really shaped things. Fretting, worry, anxiety, uncertainty make people silly and panic yes. They are tending to run towards the edges.The Australian. Hi there. Julie Heff from The Australian. Just following on from that question. In the good old days you could drive a car, get your wing-wang pulled and try not to spill your drink. How much is the cult of celebrity playing into politics since Trump?Much more than people credit it. The people who cover the presidential election don't watch TV. They really don't understand how much time people spend watching this garbage on television. You would never -- it would never occur to the average political reporter who may watch too much news or have other ways of wasting time, but we are just not - people in this room, we are not sitting around watching reality television. Wes are not doing it. It has played a huge role in Trump. Trump is somebody that every American - not every American, but millions, a couple of hundred million Americans - think they know. He has been in their house. They have heard him talk. They have seen behind the scenes with him. They feel utterly comfortable with this guy. We should have sent the idiots that do the entertainment reporting, the sleeze over at E should have been sent out on a campaign trail because they would have given us a more accurate picture of what was attractive about this guy. We don't get it. That is part and parasol of what else is going on in the world right now. We are in the midst of thevolt against the elites the elites have got it coming. I gotta tell ya! The elites all over the world have bungled a lot of things. They bungled up the EU. They bungled up the Euro. The amount of debt that we are carrying - negative interest rates in the economy, the way, the fact of The Great Recession in the first place and recovery, such as it has been since, the elites totally have enoughed up the was
situation in the Middle East. It was like they were breeding extra demons to turn loose, like those that had ever been an endangered species in the Middle East. They were going to reintroduce demons in the Middle East. That cut loose all sorts of chaos. So the elites have it coming. But, the problem with a rebellion against the elites is if you don't let the elites do the job, who does do the job? The answer is the Trumps of this world. Trump could be a lot worse. He could be coherent. (LAUGHTER) He could have a plan. He could have a plan beyond building a wall. He can actually have a plan. He could be coming to the public like a Franco. I'm not playing the Hitler card, but we could play the Peronni card or the Mussolini card or the Franco card. He could be a man with a plan and that could make him very dangerous. How long would it be before that person shows up? He's showed up already in Russia. That is their anti-elite, populist movement, Putin. How long before we get him, how long before you get him?You covered foreign policy for the Rolling Stone, I know the men with shiny medals in Australia is the weakness of the United States, the perceived weakness of the United States, particularly in the Asia-Pacific - is that a concern for you? Yes, it is a big concern to me. It is not so much I think that we are weak. We Western nations are militarily unbelievably strong. We are virtually unstoppable in any conventional situation. However, where is the leadership? We haven't even had a consistently bad foreign policy. You got to give George W Bush this. At least he had a consistent foreign policy. It was bad, but at least it was consistent. People knew what he was going to do. We seem to have had no policy whatsoever. Our policy with China. I think this applies at least as much to Australia as it applies to the US. By turn, we are scolding them for this and scolding them for that and then fawning over them for their trade. There is no perceived - it is not that we are not perceived as strong in the world, but we are perceived as uncertain, cowardly unwilling to use our strength or unpredictable when we use our strength. That is just not good. You know what I mean? We saw that kind of weakness, we saw the results. In the worst-case scenario, that kind of weakness leads to what happened between World War I and 2. Britain and the United States, even France were strong countries. But not doing anything about it. The ABC.Michael Brissington from the ABC. You touched on this a minute ago but it seems to me the response from the American electorate to Trump and I goes to Bernie Sanders to a certain extent is that a parts of the electorate feels like it is broken. It is not working for them and hasn't worked for a long time. So they are rejecting the elites, yes. If they vote for Trump, what happens? What happens when that the fails? Because, clearly, there is a man there with no ideas. Do the elites crawl off into a bunker and never came out again or is this a game-changing moment?What happens if you have continuing bitter disappointment in the political system - you are likely to have it, no matter who gets elected there will be a lot of bitter disappointment - Trump supporters will be particularly bitterly disappointed. He is not going to be able to do, I hope, that he claims. Anyway, I just finished reading - I don't know why I was reading this, it is long and boring - but Anthony Bevoir's history of the Spanish civil war. If you want to see what political chaos looks like, you just have a look at the Spanish Republic from the time of its inception until - well, long past Franco's rebellion. This is what happens when people are continually disappointed by the political system is that delay collapse into tiny warring factions and the whole fabric of society gets ripped to pieces. Comically, let us hope, in our case, but we certainly have seen plenty of examples of it happening tragically. The net result is Lebanon. That was my first foreign correspondent - first time I covered a war was the civil war in Lebanon. Boy, that tells you what happens when things really, really go the pieces. It is absolutely not pretty. I'll tell you something, the core of people being bitterly disappointed in politics is, and this is where I give my libertarian speech, my classical Liberal speech, we have expanded the power and the scope and indeed the expense of government so vastly - let's just talk about the power and scope of government - we have expanded over the past century the power and scope of government to the point where it intrudes in pretty much every corner of life. We are asking government to take care of everything for us from not cradle to grave, but, as they say in Sweden, because everything from Viagra to the Swedish national to.
Lutheran Church that nobody goes to. They say it is from erection to resurrection, the government covers everything. Now, let us for a moment stipulate that everything our government does is good. Now, that is a big stipulation, but let's just make it. Let's make a that
legal stipulation that everything that the government does is good. It still couldn't all get done. It couldn't possibly get done. We have put too much burden on government. Frederick Hiack warned us about this in the 1940s. Once government is seen as the source and the only source of every form of justice and remediation within a society, then it can refuse - it can't refuse anybody anything. Really, it is a marriage. We are married to our governments. Now, what if you said to your spouse, "OK, you make a living, but you also take care of the kids and you also cook all the food and you do all the house cleaning and you run all of the errands and you change the oil in the car and you repair the roof and while you do that, what do I do? I'll keep myself busy. I'll watch Donald Trump on television or something, but you do it all." How well is that marriage going to go? A lot of women are thinking, "Yeah, that is my marriage." I realise I probably described my own marriage pretty well, too. Nonetheless, how well does that thing work out for the couple? So we are tasking government with everything in our lives and then we are surprised when government can't come through. To the extent that government does come through and then we get the bill and we say, "What the hell is this?!" Taxes and the debt and the deficit and yet we keep asking government to do all of these things and that is, if we are looking for a root cause, there are many proximate causes for our current situation, rise of populism, public cynicism, many proximate causes for this. If we are looking for an underlying cause, we might look at the expansion of government in the Western liberal democracies. I am blaming this on the left something
incidentally because this is something that has happened all the way across the political spectrum. The left wants to do more and not pay for it and the right just wants to not pay for it. (LAUGHTER) (LAUGHS) It is all a piece of the same thing.Fairfax.Mark Kennedy from Fairfax Media Mr O'Rourke. You talked about Australia and the US being very similar in a lot of ways room
and I think most people in this room would agree, but I don't think too many people in this room who would say they are not mystified by your gun laws. I notice that Ric Scott, the Florida governor, this week said that the second amendment never shot anyone in response to the latest mass shooting in that state. So, I am wondering if the second amendment never shot anyone and guns never shot anyone, because we have been told that for a long time now, it is people, is there a fundamental difference between Americans and Australians? Is it Americans killing Americans?Yeah. We are much more - we are much bigger and much more violent society than you and we always have been. You did not treat First Australians very well. We treated first Americans as poorly or worse, but they fought back. They killed a lot of us before we got done killing them. I would say the blame is on our shoulders. They were just protecting their turf. They were within their rights. But they were good. I mean, the Shian and Texas is probably the best cavalry ever seen. Really, they would make mongol hoards invading Europe look like a bunch of old ladies with picnic baskets. So we fought our way across that country. Of course, we fought with each other and the Brits. America was born in violence to a much greater extent. We all - all countries carry their original sin and Australia was certainly - Australians
an impression of the First Australians and an impression of the second Australians were pretty badly opposed, too. We all bear our burdens, but America was a country really borne of and from fighting. The reason for - I am not going to argue gun laws one way or the other. I have my own private opinion about this and I also have a lot of guns. The reason for the second amendment was a uniquely extra European, non-European reason. The framing - the constitutional founding fathers, framers of the Constitution, were acutely aware that all through Europe, all through history, there had been whole categories of people who were not allowed to be armed who were not allowed to be armed, basically because the ruling classes didn't trust them. The peasants were not allowed to be armed. If Irish were not allowed to be armed. They were determined we would not have a country that would have cat greys. Of course the country was founded with one large category. Of course we are not allowed to have arms. We have slaves. Looking aside from that piece of bold hypocrisy in the framers, that thing is in there very much on purpose. The idea is there will never be - you have to understand how strong the idea of nobility, of an upper class, how strong that presented itself to the founding fathers in the 18th century. One of the first things they declared in their Constitution is there would never be any titles of nobility in the United States. They were really frighened that the European system would come back. It had already been partly imposed upon, never successfully imposed on the American colcies, but partly there. They were determined to get rid of that and as well as determined to get rid of that, they were determined there would be no category, no social class that was not allowed to have arms. In my own feeling about guns is Imtoo Irish. There will always be a sword in the thatch. I am hoping I don't need it. I know I won't need it. I will never need a gun to defend myself against the people who run my country. My children won't need a gun, but what about my great grandchildren? Can I be sure? What if some better Trump comes along. What if some really, really bad guys takes a hold? Do I want there to be no possibility of resistance? Is it foolish? Probably. Is it romantic, is it silly? Yeah. Anyway, that is why it is there and that is one of the things that countries.
makes us two very different countries. Just to spin off that, I'll go back to my classic liberal preaching, therein lies another danger to gigantic government, besides the disappointment of the citizens of thaty began tick government and that is when you create an enormous government, you create an enormous government power and what if bad people get a hold of it? You always have to ask yourself: What if this thing falls in? It is a bit like having a handgun around and Donald Trump is the toddler in the house. You know what, if this thing falls into the wrong hands. That is a reason, not particularly against size of government, but it is a reason why you want the checks and balances to be in place, why you want government to be devolved as much as you can and why you need to be careful of the sheer, damn size of it. I don't want to play the Hitler card because it is stupid, but would Hitler - Hitler could not have taken over Germany the way he did if the Germans had been so damn well organised. If he tried that in Spain, it would have taken, like it did with Franco, years and years and years and even now he wasn't able to put in place the kind of totalitarian regime.Australian Financial Review.You describe yourself as a libertarian.Yep.Can you make a minute to convert us all as to why we should become libertarians too?I think I was just trying. (LAUGHTER) I was trying pretty hard. It fundamentally comes down, of course, to the individual. I mean, things do. None of us know much. The one thing that we all know is that we are individuals. Now, there is a philosophical questions if we are individuals of free will or not but we sure should act like we have free will. We may have some airy opinion about whether we have free will, but we behave. When we reach for the salt shaker, we think I want the salt, I am going to take the shaker. Maybe I was predetermined at the beginning of the cosmos. Anyway we conceivable we are individuals. It is not a political philosophy at all. It is really a gauge. It is three questions that I think need to always be asked whenever power is exercised by one person over another person. Is this situation conducive, does it further individual dignity? Does it further individual liberty? Does it further individual responsibility? Individual dignity, individual liberty, individual responsety into me, these are the three central questions of any social and political arrangement that we may have. Of course, the answer to all of those things is all very complicated. One does not achieve some sort of perfect situation of perfect human liberty, perfect human dignity and perfect human responsibility. There are three things that need to be asked and never more so when you deal with government. The thing that fundamentally must be remembered about government is the government has a legal monopoly on deadly force. Government is not just some other pressure group. Government is not your boss. Government is not your spouse. Government is not your partner. Government actually has a special kind of power. Now, we may democratically decide what government is going to do. That may be fair and well done and carefully calculated and tabulated, but once the government has that decision, they have powers to enforce it that no individual does. In a free society. In an unfree society, of course, individuals do have the capacity to enforce that. We don't want that. You know, we don't want to privatise the military. We don't want to be like Lebanon. We have
certainly don't want Somalia. We root
have to remember that is at the root of government and that is why it is so important to ask those questions about the individual. That is the best I can do.Thank you for your address today from the National Press Club. Your point about your comparative on the first Americans and the First Australians. Can I commend further readings Pemelwoy amongst many leaders of the resistance against the First Australians for further reference.OK. Point taken.I think you have described yourself in the past about saying that your whole purpose in life is to basically to offend anyone who listens to NPR. Do you think as the years have gone on, though, that you are more of an equal opportunity offender, you have a wider-ranger of people you like to offend in your political coverage and satire that you bring to those things? A col rollry to that, is there a momentwhen the role and the craft of a satirist sometimes you feel needs to branch set aside because you feel such a profound disquiet about what you see in politics you want to be serious for a while as well.You have seen me being as serious as I get. So not particularly serious. Yes. I mean, there are times - satire, tentically is humour with some sort of moral or ethical message to it. The reason for the humour is to attract attention to the message. I have always thought myself fundamentally humanist and not a fundamental satirist. I don't have the feeling that I know what is right for the world and I know exactly how people should behave. So I just make fun of stuff. I probably don't offend as broadly as I used to because there are so many people who are so young, I don't even know how to offend them. (LAUGHTER) There are often off on something else. As you get older, your world narrows down a little bit and maybe I should be really making bitter, angry fun of Pokemon Go. Except I am not sure what it is. (LAUGHS) Tony Melville, Director of the National Press Club. I don't want with
to sound like a Trump supporter with this question. A lot of people laughed at Ronald Reagan being in his PJs at midday but the other half thought he was one of the greatest presidents. We have mentioned Russia a couple of times. Can Russia really be campaigning for the Democrats? No, no. Sorry, for Trump against the Democrats? Yeah, yeah! I think the Putin strategy is just so chaos. All he really wants is for the West, which he sees as more unified than we see it. He sees the Western democracy's raid against him with more unity than we actually have. We should be so unified in our opposition to Putin. Anyway, he just likes to make truck. Anything that weakens us, anything that causes us trouble is good for him, as far as he is concerned. So, I don't think - yeah, I think he would think it is great if Trump got elected because it would weaken America and I am sure he feels that he could pull the wool over Trump's eyes and doubtless he could. So I am sure he is in fwai vour of Trump. But it is more than -- favour of Trump. It is troublemaking.
more just the instinct of troublemaking. Apparently, Putin has done quite a bit to support Nationalist, populist parties in Europe. I only know that second-hand, but I have seen it reported often enough that I think there is substance to that. There was something else...Could Trump be a Reagan?Oh, no, no, no. That is a major confusion of order and category. It wasn't that Ronald Reagan was a brilliant guy or anything, but he had a considerable body of political thinking behind his ideas. Now, he may not have read Bourke in the original, but nonetheless he was conversant with all of those ideas. There were at least 200 years of coherent conservative thinking and certainly , at least since Frederick Hiacka's book was published in the '40s, and Reagan had read that, as a matter of fact, and economists like Milton and Rose Freedman and the...



MARTIN CLUNES: Man's
ancient relationship with animals is constantly evolving.

For thousands of years they were
little more than our slaves...

..our supper... Hmm.

..our power. But in our modern world,
all that is changing.

Today, animals have rights. This is a real privilege, isn't it? You don't often get to stroke a swan,
do you?

Some pets are no longer part
of the family, they are the family. MARTIN: With a spoon? That's mental. Horses are not just animals
that we ride, they are therapists too. This is a nice horse.

Animals we once feared or reviled
are now valued and protected.

The more we learn about animals'
brainpower, the more we care.

But underneath it all, do we still just want to exercise
control over them? This is absolute heaven. (Chuckles)

Has respect all come too late?

To find out, I'm going to investigate
where we've reached in the extraordinary 200,000-year
history of man and beast. # Theme music

As a child, I loved animals. Nothing special, just dogs and cats. But as a grown man,
on my farm in Dorset, I've surrounded myself with them.

Until a few hundred years ago,
nobody would have done this.

If they were lucky,
dogs lived in kennels.

Bringing them into our homes as pets
changed everything.

For the first time
emotions became involved. Humans basked in the affection
of a domesticated beast, treasured their loyalty, felt comforted
by their unquestioning love. Today, we talk to them... Good lad. ..will them to be clever, look for and encourage
any human traits... Good lad, good lad. .. and in some instances, they even
start being seen as almost human. That's when it gets a bit worrying because they're not.

Nowhere on earth
is this more apparent than Japan. Here, pet ownership is scaling
new heights of intensity.

For many years, there have been
more dogs and cats than children. And now, over 24 million
cats and dogs share the pavements of Japan's
already crowded cities.

At its heart is the devotion
I cherish in my own dogs, a devotion that has turned one
legendary canine into a virtual god.

The story behind the statue of a dog
called Hachiko in the heart of Tokyo symbolises just how important
dogs have become here and all over the world.

Hachiko was an Akita,
a unique Japanese breed, and every evening, when his owner
returned from work on the train, Hachiko would be waiting.

But one day
the dog's owner didn't return, he suffered a stroke and died.

Every day for the next nine years, Hachiko waited for his master
at the station.

Over the years
the story spread far and wide.

What people admired about Hachiko was his unending loyalty
to his master, even after his death.

Hachiko became the perfect expression of why man allowed dogs into his life
in the first place.

In Japan, today's Akitas are revered,
celebrity dogs almost.