The Prof G Pod with Scott Galloway
00:40:54 · Heather Cox Richardson
[00:40:54] S1: No. And so there... It hasn't been overturned before, but there... There's not... Been nothing in terms of a Supreme Court decision like that. What you did have in the eighteen nineties were a very few robber barons, as we call them now industrialists, who did in fact run the political system. And one of those statistics I like is that JD Rockefeller controlled about 2% of the nation's g d... GDP. Elon Musk controls 3%. So so we do have a moment in which we had very wealthy people controlling our political system, and that gets overturned, of course, in the twentieth century, both beginning with the progressive era and then later on. So we've had it before, but I would say I agree with you. Citizens United is the the thing that's gotta go first. That being said, there is something interesting about the idea of the breakup of these monopolies and the the large corporations. And that said, of course, this is exactly exactly where we were in the election of nineteen twelve. And in that case, all three of the major candidates running were running as progressives. Gene Debs was also running. He was running as a socialist. It's the highest any presidential candidate is running as a socialist ever, number of votes such a person ever got. But the the reason that Teddy Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, was apoplectic about Woodrow Wilson running as a democrat. There are many reasons, but one of the ones that he was upset about in terms of trusts was that Woodrow Wilson kept calling for the destruction of the trusts that everybody recognized were a problem and along with it, the destruction of a federal government. Get rid of the federal government. Make it small. Put everything back to the states. And what Teddy Roosevelt kept saying was the minute you do that, those trusts are just gonna reform. So he came up with a system that called for the breakup of the trusts, but also insisted on having a strong government that maintained the the destruction of trusts and maintained a world in which there was there was economic competition. And at the end of the day, it didn't really matter because Woodrow Wilson ends up in World War one and ends up with a system that looks very much like Theodore Roosevelt's system.
00:43:11 · Heather Cox Richardson, Scott Galloway
But I do think it's worth thinking about the fact that one of the complaints on the radical right about the idea of breaking up these monopolies or this concentration of economic power is that in order to do that, you've gotta maintain a government that has regulators and that has rules and that actually does such a thing, and they're very much against the idea of a strong federal government. They'd rather get rid of that power, send it back to the states. And when that happens, the people who are running these mega corporations can do whatever they want. [00:43:46] S0: So we talked a little bit about the GOP and historical analogies to some of the tumult it's going through and MAGA. Let's talk about the Democratic Party, specifically the emergence of the DSA. What is what does history tell us about the prospects? Is is the emergence of the DSA structural shift? Is it a is it a is it a hot, you know, a hot take? The Democratic Socialists of America, your thoughts.
00:44:17 · Heather Cox Richardson
[00:44:17] S1: So I'm gonna say something that is probably a little different than a lot of people are saying. One of the things that I have noticed... Of course, remember, there's a difference between the national DSA and the people who are running at state or local levels and calling themselves members of the DSA, and that's an important distinction. But one of the things that if you look around you now at the nation as a whole, and if you are willing to go along with me with the idea that the MAGA movement has jumped off a cliff and left everybody else who doesn't wanna jump off the cliff kind of eyeing each other nervously about whether or not you can make common cause with those those people. Right? One of the things you have seen is that people running as non Republicans around the country have taken on a lot of different names. They have called themselves Democratic Socialists. They have called themselves Prairie Populists. They... Some are running as independents. They are backing away from the name Democratic, especially in states where there are lot of Republicans, where it's almost as if they're trying to create a bridge out of that party. So in terms of what DSA actually means in this context, to me, it's a way to say, I believe in these things that are wildly popular. Like I say, at this point, Universal Health Care, for example, gathers 57% of Republicans, not in... Not independents and Democrats, but 57% of Republicans want that. This is really low hanging fruit. It's a way to say, I believe in all that stuff, and so it's okay to vote for me because I'm not really a democrat even if I'm embracing the same democratic principles. So I'm looking at them, and I'm thinking, you explained to me the difference between somebody like Mamdani and somebody like Brian Poindexter. And they're really... Mean... And by the way, there's different flavors. Some people are really emphasizing reproductive health care, especially in states where the Republicans have tried to overturn constitutional amendments, enshrining reproductive health care in their constitutions. Other people are running on workers' rights. You know, there's there's different things that they're emphasizing, but I just don't see a huge amount of daylight between any of these labels. Where I see the daylight is, as you say, between this whole group of people and the MAGA Republicans.
00:46:48 · Heather Cox Richardson, Scott Galloway, S2, S4, S3
Right now, it's a more we're not them. We're us, and we're gonna go for these really popular things, but they have not yet articulated a a party wide position, which is what I think is gonna happen over the next two years. [00:47:05] S0: We'll be right back. [00:47:13] S2: Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile with a message for everyone paying Big Wireless way too much. Please, for the love of everything good in this world, stop. With Mint, you can get premium wireless for just $15 a month. Of course, if you enjoy overpaying, no judgments, but that's weird. Okay. One judgment. Anyway, give it a try at mintmobile.com/switch. [00:47:35] S4: Upfront payment of $45 for three month plan equivalent to $15 per month required. Intro rate first three months only, then full price plan options available. Taxes and fees extra. See full terms at mintmobile.com. [00:47:44] S0: Support for the show comes from Brex. [00:47:46] S3: Ask yourself, what are your best people spending their time on right now? Expense reports, receipt chasing, month end close that takes weeks? You become what you spend on, and that's not what you're building toward. Brex is the intelligent finance platform that eliminates that work before it starts. AI agents that handle the manual stuff automatically so your team can spend more time on what actually compounds. It's time to get Brex AF. Learn more at brex.com/af. That's brex.com/af.
00:48:18 · Scott Galloway, Heather Cox Richardson
[00:48:18] S0: Support for the show comes from USA Facts. I've interviewed countless politicians, and if there's one thing we all find disconcerting is when they butcher the facts with some biased half truth. Give us a break already. So when I had the chance to debate conservative podcaster Ben Shapiro, our natural response was bring it on. Why? Because it was sponsored by USA Facts, and each debate segment started with a presentation of government data and facts, employment, government spending, income data, housing, and more. The topic, the American dream. Is it still within reach? We argued. We found some common ground. We actually debated, and there were no personal attacks. Watch the full debate on The USA Facts YouTube channel. We think you'll find it unlike any other debate. That is entertaining and informative. We hope you check it out. We're back with more from Heather Cox Richardson. So Heather, I'm gonna brag now because I'm desperate for your affirmation, but I reached new levels of of pride today. Elon Musk said of me that he has never had any clue and has a picture of me, which is I wear as a badge of honor, but there is a question here. [00:49:36] S1: Don't you have any... Wait. What don't you have any clue about?
00:49:36 · Heather Cox Richardson, Scott Galloway
[00:49:36] S1: Don't you have any... Wait. What don't you have any clue about? [00:49:39] S0: Oh, I wrote that SpaceX was essentially using is the organ donor for Tesla shareholders, that SpaceX shareholders are gonna bail out Tesla, which is a, in my opinion, a failing car company that trades like a software company, but more boring stock stuff than than than is warranted in this conversation. The larger question is the following. Is there a historical route? I believe, and I've said this publicly, I think that Elon Musk is a traitor to the West. And that if Charles Lindbergh had managed to buy McDonnell Douglas, one of the largest aircraft companies in the middle part of the last century, and then had control over their guidance systems. And Roosevelt had decided to give DC-3 to the British, to the RAF to try and fend off Hitler's attack on London. And then somehow Lindbergh unilaterally decided to disable the radar on those planes. And as a result, the blitzkrieg increased in ferocity. I would be curious how we would treat Charles Lindbergh. I see this nothing less than... You know, look what we did to the Rosenbergs. I think we have normalized the notion that because people have billions of dollars and they're innovators and they're geniuses with technology and is all of that, that they get to live by an absolute different set of standards for which I'd... I see no historical reference here. So ground me in history around Elon Musk, how he acquits himself, and what we can learn from past examples of people with this much power.