283- A Third Term with the Tyrant challenges our constitutional values With Paul Greenberg

Paul Greenberg joins us to discuss his satirical novel "The Third Term," which imagines George Washington returning from the past to challenge a Trump-like tyrant seeking an unconstitutional third presidential term. Written in just one month during 2020 but published for the 2024 election cycle, this compact, fast-paced satire examines what America's founding ideals mean in an era of personality cults and constitutional crises.

• Washington was chosen as protagonist because he established the two-term precedent, prioritizing democracy over personal power
• The tyrant character is infuriated by Washington's omnipresence on American currency, highlighting his obsession with fame and status
• Modern politics has abandoned character for team loyalty, exactly what the founders warned against in the Federalist Papers
• Digital distraction and smartphone addiction parallel political dysfunction, both diminishing our capacity for critical thinking
• Protests across America show growing awareness of democratic erosion, though media coverage often focuses only on isolated violence
• Book aims to puncture political bubbles, appealing to readers across the political spectrum concerned about democratic norms

Find "The Third Term" available now on Amazon and at independent bookstores, with an audiobook releasing soon. A screenplay adaptation is also in development.

Follow Paul Greenberg at ...

Website

https://www.paulgreenberg.org/

Medium

https://4fishgreenberg.medium.com/

Chapters

• 0:00 Introducing Author Paul Greenberg
• 6:25 The Third Term: Book Concept Explained
• 12:43 Washington vs. The Tyrant
• 18:53 Constitutional Threats and Third Term Dangers
• 25:45 Political Apathy and Digital Distraction
• 34:42 The Founders' Vision vs. Modern Politics
• 39:50 Book Reception and Call to Action

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:12

welcome everyone to politically high tech with your host, elias. I have another newcomer, and this is going to be a great newcomer, for sure, and just to give it just a very, very brief, because I feel the momentum is already going up and I know when to shut the heck up. Talk as little as possible, because the momentum is about to go already. So just to make this super efficient, super efficient, because I want to hear what he has to say. This he's a very accomplished author already.

Speaker 1: 0:38

Okay, his name is paul greenberg, and you know, and, and the new york times recognizes you for your contributions. I know some of you say it's a left-wing paper. Yeah, to some degree it is, but come on, they got good culture, arts and all that. I pay attention to that just a little bit more, if I'm going to be honest. I mean, new York Times is a great paper, even though they kind of have a left slanted coverage, but it's still pretty informative. I would still say, despite having that, you know, and it's okay, you know there are certain like right-wing coverages that I would say is pretty informative. Definitely not fox. Okay, let me just be clear. I did more entertainment, but you know I'll save that for another time.

Speaker 1: 1:14

So I have an author here, a very accomplished author. He writes about many things, but the main thing we'll talk about and then we could branch to other things is the third term with the tyrant. You know who the tyrant is. I'm not going to give you any hints. It's going to be easier than you think. All right, let's welcome Paul Greenberg. What do you want? The audience, the viewers and the listeners?

Speaker 2: 1:34

to know about you. Thanks, thanks, elias. Well, great to be on your show, so yeah, so I'll tell you the story of this book. As you mentioned, I'm known for a lot of writing in the New York Times, mostly about fishing, the environment outdoors, that kind of thing and I was sort of going along my merry way writing about that kind of stuff.

Speaker 2: 1:50

But then, in 2020, when Trump was running for a second term, I was so struck by the degree to which his supporters just didn't respond to any realities whatsoever and a thought occurred to me. Well gosh, even if George Washington himself were to come back from the past, would his supporters support Washington or would they support Trump? And that? You know writers, you know we work in a weird world where, you know, funny ideas come to us in the middle of the night and then, when the sun comes up, we think, well, maybe, what would? What would happen if I wrote this down? And, unlike unlike all the other books that I've written, which have taken me years and slogs and lots of time, this one came out in a month, or I wrote it in a month. Keep in mind it's 2020. Nobody really wanted to hear about George Washington at the time. It was the peak of Black Lives Matters. Washington was a slave owner. Nobody wanted to talk about him. So actually nobody wanted the book and I put it in a drawer and I thought, well, we'll see Biden won. And I thought, ok, well, never have to publish this book.

Speaker 2: 2:44

Cut to 2024 and we're back at the same place again.

Speaker 2: 2:48

A small family foundation, actually, who had read the book back in 2020, said you know, let's bring this book out. This is leading up to the election in November and I was like OK, we got a very famous author to illustrate the cover I can show you the cover right here named Barry Blitt, who does all the covers for the New Yorker that are about Trump, and we brought it out. So the scenario is it's 2028, a sort of like David Axelrod, david Plouffe type character realizes that the electorate is frozen. There's no way to win this election in the traditional manner. So, through some writerly sleight of hand, he manages to bring Washington back from the past, from his deathbed, and resurrect him in time for the 2028 election and, as my brother the screenwriter, says, hilarity ensues. It's a comedy, it's a satire, it's a little bit, it's poking fun at the left and the right and it's an attempt to really get us to focus on what are our core values as a country and what do we want from our leaders ultimately, in the years to come.

Speaker 1: 3:47

Yeah, that's a great synopsis right there. I'm not going to add anything to it. I'm afraid I'm going to move it at this point and, if you notice, this is very New York-esque podcast. I'm a New Yorker, I'm sure Paul's a New Yorker, I think.

Speaker 2: 4:03

where are you broadcasting from?

Speaker 1: 4:05

so I do have some questions about the, the book, and then we get tied to political events. You know I'll go with your flow from there because, yeah, so for a lot of things you're saying is very sound and that's so. I don't need to vet him people, I already did ahead of time. So you know, and so far it is great. So why are we picked up? Washington know, david axelrod, he's. He's a brilliant political strategist. There's no doubt about it.

Speaker 2: 4:30

I might agree with all his politics, but he is a brilliant strategist, you know well, so, first of all, it's not david axelrod, it is a david axelrod inspired character oh yeah, he's his name is.

Speaker 2: 4:41

His is um is tonnelly in this book, um robert tonnelly. So he's Robert Tonnelly. So he's a fictional character. But it's a really good question why Washington? So for me, Washington is really interesting because he is actually the one who set the precedent that a president should only serve two terms, and why he did that was in part because he didn't believe in kings. He didn't believe in, you know, staying president for life. But he was also exhausted. He was sick. He could barely speak because his teeth were so bad. He had a pustule in his thigh that erupted every few years, threatening all sorts of disease. He was exhausted and what he really wanted to do was to retire to what he thought he deserved was a relaxing time at Mount Vernon.

Speaker 2: 5:23

What I think is interesting is that you cut to 20, and the present president, who has threatened many times that he will seek a third term. Now keep in mind, between Washington and now, a 22nd Amendment was enacted which prohibits a president from running for more than two terms. So if Trump were to do so, he would be in violation of the Constitution. So I thought it was an interesting parallel to have, on the one hand, this great hero of the American Revolution who doesn't want a third term but is being forced into one, and on the other hand, this tyrant who desperately, desperately wants a third term, in spite of whether it's good or not for the country. You know it's thrown out in the book, you know why not Lincoln, why not Jefferson, et cetera, et cetera. But the other thing I think that I would play it around and I play around with this in the book is where do we see Washington's face the most? Where do you see it? What do you?

Speaker 1: 6:12

think I mean me. I mean I see him in the dollar bill, right.

Speaker 2: 6:16

Exactly Money. He's on money, he's on the dollar quarter, he's omnipresent on money. And what is the present president concerned himself with? Most? Money and damage right? So there's a certain point at which the tyrant actually gets furious by the fact that, no matter where he turns, he can't get away from Washington's face. And unless he upends the entire currency system of the country, there will always be one president greater than he. Of course there are many presidents greater than he, but in his fictional created world I think he deeply believes that he is the most famous person ever. But then there's living proof in the dollar in the corner that somebody else was first and somebody else was greater. Readers of the book will see that. You know, in the course of the debates. This is how Washington gets under the tyrant's skin. You know of like pointing out that. You know, no matter what, washington is more honorable. Honorable person, a more present person, more brave person, and all those characteristics don't jive with the tyrant's image of himself.

Speaker 1: 7:18

Yep Me, I want to make this spoiler free as possible, unless the guest wants to spoil it, but I doubt that's the case. Let's be honest, look, I, I, I read it and you know, even I like to mix the deck. Yeah, even though he was based on david axelrod it's a good thing you correct me right there, because I think only someone brilliant like the axelrod could just bring you know this. You know the irreplaceable, the one who set the precedent. Like you said, it wasn't legally enforced until the 22nd. Um, but thing is, you know, you already know that. You know who the tyrant is. I'm just gonna use his name for the rest of this podcast.

Speaker 1: 7:52

The tyrant flirted with the third term and a couple of republicans was trying to draft some very preliminary stupid ideas. That's not gonna pass to. They don't got them. They don't got the numbers. Anyways, they got the thinnest majority in the house, so it's not going to happen and the senate not going to happen either. I mean, you need super majorities in the president ending, you need 75, which that is, 38 states. That's not happening either. Republicans barely I could say they barely have hold on 27 states. Yeah, you need 11 more to go. And the way how strong some of the blue states are, that is, they are not budging anytime soon. I could definitely say New York, I could say California, I could say Illinois, hawaii, washington State and others. They're not going to budge. Yeah, well, at least at least not very quickly.

Speaker 2: 8:42

We hope you know. The thing is that you and I are both operating under the premise that the rules of this country still apply and that they will still apply in 2028. You know, it depends how sort of freaked out you are. I think that there are those who believe that we're experiencing a coup in real time, coup in the traditional sense, because we do have an elected president. It's not a military coup, but it's a dismantling of different aspects of the government that make a democracy possible. So whether or not a third term is allowed by the Constitution and, you know, through normal electoral norms, that certainly seems to me. I 100% agree with you. There seems to be no other way. There seems to be no way constitutionally for a third term to occur. But if you break the building and just build a whole new house, then who's to say? What is the president? What does presidency even mean? So that's the thing I think is the kind of flair I wanted to send up when I wrote the book in the first place.

Speaker 1: 9:42

Yeah, I mean, I always look, I'm pro vigilance. It's good to be aware. Don't bury your head in the sand. You know, I'm, I get, I get that. I'm not against that. So, yeah, let's be aware because you know, let's be real, the tyrant, for the interest of this episode. That's unpredictable. And he's a disruptor. I mean, and he's a disruptor, I mean there's no being around that bush right, it's. He could prove it with many examples. And he, you know, he flip-flops. I mean, he complains about other people doing it, but I've never seen someone flip-flop as much as him. Um, the tyrant, just for interest this episode. If you know who it is, congratulations, you're getting no prize.

Speaker 2: 10:20

Yes, it should be obvious and, by the way, you know the way it happens in the book, when you know and there's a little bit of a spoiler, but it takes place in the first five pages of the book. But when Washington is awoken from the past thing, I like to play it, I play around with them. I'm sure you've seen your, your share of time trial travel stories and you know there's always a lot of surprise when the person from the past comes, oh, what is this? What surprise. When the person from the past comes, oh, what is this? What is this material? It's so smooth, Is it plastic or that kind of stuff? And I actually wanted to completely dispense with that.

Speaker 2: 10:55

And Washington is presented as somebody who he just, he just knows what's going on. And he wakes up and he looks around and he immediately recognizes he's being, he's surrounded by political campaign managers, people he's known all his life, and he sighs and he says has Tyra has arisen, hasn't he? And yes, he has. You know, he just he just knows it and part of it the way I explained a little bit, you know, because when you think, like, how would he really know?

Speaker 2: 11:16

But there's a sequence at the very beginning where Washington thinks he's dying, and, you know, the light opens up at his feet and he feels he's being sucked in and I think the line I say is that you know Washington had touched eternity and so there's something, a little bit, it's a little bit like the Last of Us. You know, when you get touched by the fungus, it goes all over your brain. He touched eternity and so to some degree, he's been filled with all the knowledge of the world and so he comes into 2028 fully savvy and, in a way, you know, the good thing I think the good thing about the book a third term is it's short. I don't think people read long books that much anymore, and to write a short and efficient book you don't really have time for, like, what's this? Is it plastic? Why is that plane flying overhead? Let's just get into the business right now and get right down to the fight between Washington and the tyrant.

Speaker 1: 12:13

Oh, you know absolutely. That's why I praised about it. You're just straight to the point, get straight to a good point. You know, produce as least amount of steps possible. You know full and coherent enough, obviously just to get to the point, because sometimes being efficient let's be honest, being efficient is not always easy, yeah, so it doesn't want to over explain. We'll do that, so let's, I'm going to give the author credit.

Speaker 2: 12:27

Yeah, it's funny. So my brother is a screenwriter, writes a lot of horror and science fiction and wrote Halloween, h20 and Pet Sematary and stuff like that. And he always says to me the writer's job is to get out of his own way. And I think a lot of times writers are. You know, they're so in love with their words, they're so in love with their words, they're so in love with their plot devices and stuff. You know there's a, there's a phrase in the writing world which is kill your darlings and that basically means that whenever you're too in love with a sentence or a plot point or a paragraph, it's really time to you got to get rid of it. So anyone out there who's listening, who's a writer kill your darlings if you can.

Speaker 1: 13:03

Oh, he's not the first author to be a guest, for sure. You know we have many others I'm sure. Come on, bookworms or authors. You know this is kind of the episode for you really. You know it's going to be pretty political, but I'm fine with it. It makes it out of my out of my touching the same event in different angles. I just think it's interesting to me. Yeah, I mean, one of them, them I was touching more from a conservative state, even though this person was a progressive. I mean, you know, yes, he's a progressive. I said, okay, yes, I could touch this in a different angle. As long as there's a different angle, I'm interested.

Speaker 1: 13:38

Once I get, I hear the same nonsense over over again, I can't stand it. Yes, I'm not a fan of reruns or even rereading a book unless I have to understand it. I don't even just understand, just refresh a certain point that is important that I want to articulate or bring out. Otherwise I would not do that. That's the kind of person I am. But I'm not going to talk too much about me because Well, I actually am curious.

Speaker 2: 14:05

So you started this podcast like how long ago? Ooh, this is my fifth year. Wow, amazing. So like, what's it? Like you know running a podcast? Like, do you going in and out of different political environments and different tech environments? Like, how have you felt? How have you found the podcast environment? Is it worth it to do it? Is it, you know? Do you find that you're in touch with people? Are people reaching out to you?

Speaker 1: 14:25

at first I thought I was completely out of touch with reality. That was my negative thinking. Keep creeping in but little by little people start to say, oh, this is a great show and all that. I've listened to it, it's great and all that I mean it's organically growing. That's. That's the part I like. I hate when things just grow quickly. It comes crashing down because I know I could get you to school. Things get grown, so I'm happy to actually go as's like. Keeps me be humble, stay grounded and be realistic and be sober minded do you feel like you know?

Speaker 2: 14:52

because I it's been interesting for me. You know, traditionally, um, I've published seven books. You know the most known of my books is called four fish. It was a new york times bestseller, and so with all those other books I've been entirely on traditional media, you know. So you know CNN, new York Times, npr, all these kinds of stations like that.

Speaker 2: 15:13

What's been interesting about this is because I self-published a third term. I've had to do it all myself and so I've been using this service which I think is how we met, called Podmatch, you know, which matches guests and hosts. So you know, normally, as you pointed out, you know, I'm sort of like in my little bubble. You know the New York Times, npr, da-da-da-da-da. And now when you know I have had a lot, a lot of podcast interviews.

Speaker 2: 15:39

I don't know who's going to show up on the other end of the podcast. You know what I mean and I've been talking to all kinds of really interesting things. But what is interesting is whether I'm talking to a middle of the road guy like you, or people on the left, or I've had hardcore MAGA hosts interview me, lots of libertarians. All of them are terrified about the idea of a third term and all of them feel like that's really the third rail. You know that's going to electrocute the system and it's interesting like they don't from the right, the left, the center, the fringe. Nobody quite knows how to reframe this and to say like this is insane, you know what I mean and say like let's get back to something that fits within the realm of civil, normal political discourse and everyone wants to get back to that, but nobody quite knows how.

Speaker 1: 16:21

That's the trillion dollar question, isn't it? How do we get back to? I mean'm? Well, I'm not gonna say I know the answer, obviously don't. I'm just I'm just gonna debunk any speculation about that. No, I don't have the answer to it, I'm trying to find out myself. How can we get back to, you know, constructive debates, debate of ideas? You know, instead of this radicalism of both sides, or even three sides, if you will, of of america, I? It is a problem and I'm happy. At least all of them are spooked, doesn't matter what political spectrum that they're in. At least there is to me that's.

Speaker 1: 16:55

I'll say that's a little bit of a shining light, but sadly, the grifters of the MAGA movement, particularly not all Republicans, not going to single you all out, and I'm sure it's plenty of Republicans that are being critical and think this is crazy. I'm not going to single you all out, and I'm sure as many Republicans are being critical and think this is crazy. This is madness. I don't want to single out Republicans, but the MAGA fringe commentators. You're going to be in the wrong. You're in the wrong side of history. Just MAGA, not Republican. You're in the wrong side of history.

Speaker 1: 17:19

You are supporting someone and I hope you do your best to not make him a. He's already a cult leader, sadly. I had to settle with that. I didn't want to admit that, but he's cultish, okay, he has this cult MAGA. If you disagree with them, you're the enemy, you're a bad person, just because of one disagreement, which is ridiculous. Disagreement doesn't equal hate. I've said that many times. I just think it's going to take a collective effort, I guess, because this is a very large problem. This, you know, no systemic issue has been solved by one person unless, yeah, one person that says that they led the charge. But it needs a massive effort, no doubt.

Speaker 2: 17:55

Well, it's part of the reason I chose this kind of almost like surreal, magical construct of Washington coming back, you know, because it's almost like the bubble needs to be punctured by a serious historical reality check and, even so, a little spoiler. But you know, when Washington goes to run for what, he basically storms the Democratic National Convention. And there are two other candidates on the slate. There's a guy who's very conservative, conservative Democrat, who's from, you know, an old banking or real estate family in Chicago, and he's a complete and total idiot, but he looks good. And the other candidate is named Jehan Syed. Who is they? We don't know what their identity is or ethnicity, and they are encompassing of so many identities that no one is ever able to criticize their platform or their character, because the character is entirely about identity. So when Washington steps forward between an idiot and an identity-less person, he's just representing what most Americans believe and want Somebody with character, somebody who's honest, somebody who is courageous. Washington I did a fair amount of research for this book. It's kind of amazing. The balls on this guy. I mean, you know he during the French and Indian War he rode ahead of his troops straight into musket fire. He came back, his military tunic was full of holes. Nobody knows to this day how he survived that, but he did, and he would do it again. You know where we have a president right now who dodged military service because of bone spurs. You know, I said this on one of the MAGIC podcasts and they're like well, what about the time he got shot so well he didn't know he was going to get shot. Would he have shown up at that rally if they'd said, sir, there's a sniper on the roof and he's going to shoot? You Don't think so. You know so I. So I don't know.

Speaker 2: 19:44

I think that there are people out there who are courageous. I think there are people out there who care about this country rather than themselves. And is that too much to ask? You know what I mean. I think there's been this weird thing that's happened with the present aga movement, where people identify with Trump so much that they feel that what's good for him is good for them. But I don't believe that our current president believes that. I think he believes what's good for him is what's good for him and the rest of us are just dupes, in sort of following along with it. And the amount of enrichment, the amount of corruption that's been going on. It's just dizzying. So is it too much to ask for a president who is not enriching themselves in the process of becoming the leader of this country?

Speaker 1: 20:26

As of now. That is too much to ask, apparently, because they came out.

Speaker 1: 20:31

No, I hate to be such a smart aleck here. I mean, apparently, you know they came out rich themselves and if they are slightly generous I don't know if this word's slight their friends share that. Only their friends, not you, not you, not you, not you. Normal masses, you're not part of that unless you're real close to the guy or a certain politician. And this is not just a MAGA thing. This has been like classic corruption with stock trades and all of that.

Speaker 1: 20:58

But I always say this and I'm going to say this more often the tyrant is the symptom of the problem. It just got worse. Yeah, okay, it was building up the tyrant's, not the root cause, and you know, and I just think it's gonna take collective effort. I mean, there's been massive protests bubbling all over the country and they're they're somewhat small and of course there are larger ones. I mean, so far, the the climax is happening in los angeles, california, right now, but there could probably be more climaxes because New York City is protesting too as well as we speak, except for Chicago. You know a lot of the major cities you could think of.

Speaker 2: 21:35

What do you? What do you? What do you? How do you take these protests and you know, in in California, where, where would you stand? Or you know, I know you're a sort of, you're a moderate, but like, what's your feeling about that?

Speaker 1: 21:44

I mean I'm happy that they're protesting. Let's just be clear, and I've said this, I said look, I'm for protests. Do they annoy me? Sometimes Of course they do, but you know, in this case, with all this rapid radicalization, it is an absolute necessary. So let's just put my petty little inconvenient feelings aside and be on the self right and protest for the country. You know, and this is your complaint, this is your legitimate complaint. You know, like I said, the writing part. Of course I'm against that. I mean, that goes well. I shouldn't have to say that. But for the most part I see that, and this is I blame all media, I don't care it's left, right or center, they always highlight the violence.

Speaker 1: 22:29

Always highlight the chaos, they don't at least give a general scene or even views of a lot more peaceful people protesting. I mean, that's the vast majority and I've been to some protests on the ground myself. Vast majority of people are protesting peacefully, absolutely. That's always been the case. It's not me supporting the leftists and their cause, it's just reality. Even right-leaning protests have passed through. Even they have the majority of them. They protest peacefully.

Speaker 1: 22:59

They may cause noise, block certain streets. Is that annoying and inconvenient? Of course it is, but sometimes you got to put your sheltered, stupid little needs aside. They could wait Nine out of ten times. They could wait and just join the protests. I've joined several of them myself. Hopefully I'll be able to catch at least one of them in New York. I think they're going to be around for a little bit. Big one coming up on Saturday, supposedly. Yeah, hopefully I'll be able to catch at least one of them in New York. Yeah, pretty soon. I think they're going to be around for a little bit. Big one coming up on Saturday, supposedly. Yeah, I heard about it. Yeah, I definitely have heard about that. I said hmm.

Speaker 2: 23:37

I know it's a pretty diverse place. You know a lot of different kind of communities. What's the feeling on the ground saying?

Speaker 1: 23:45

you just want to talk about those demographics in general, or?

Speaker 2: 23:48

well, no, it just. You know how does it feel in your neighborhood. You know, walk down your street you're gonna pass some are just minding their business.

Speaker 1: 23:56

I mean, that's new yorker, some just minding their business, I won't be bothered. And then there's, um, you know a few, and I'm shocked because neighborhoods I've been living in they normally just say, oh, I don't want to be, I don't want to deal with this, I, I don't care about that, has nothing to do with me, they ain't fixing my problem, so I don't care. That's normal sentiment and that's still, and that sentiment, believe it or not, is still pretty prevalent, and that's said. If that sentiment gets too big, hopefully, you know, the protest awareness grows big to the point that it can overshadow it. But that's that a big problem that no one is obviously talking about. The apathy you know, one of them did brought it up and I got to give a shout out to Kirk Beck. Apathy is one of our biggest problems, absolutely, and selfishness Absolutely.

Speaker 2: 24:38

High selflessness. Well, and you know so, not to push my various products, but you know one of my other sort of really—.

Speaker 1: 24:45

Actually, let me cut you off Before you do that. I encourage shameless plugins, so go ahead.

Speaker 2: 24:50

Well, I was just going to say I think one of the places where apathy has really hit this country hard is with the iPhone and with the way that people think of their phone as their entire world. So actually a few years ago I wrote this book called Goodbye Phone, hello World. You can actually look through it, but it's a book, you know. I wrote this when my son was going into middle school and he wanted to get an iPhone and we were like you know what, let's hold off on that. And he's like well, but you have an iPhone. I was like true, so I actually quit my iPhone and I switched to a flip phone.

Speaker 2: 25:20

You know I'm totally computer savvy and you know we're talking today over, you know, the internet. Let's not completely become Luddites on all this question. But I do think that most of the young people I know and most people the world kind of goes by in a scroll, like they don't necessarily connect the images that they're seeing on their phone with actual reality. And I think you know, as you say, you know these protests are mostly peaceful. But if you are only getting your information through a phone and through filters, right-wing filters that are trying to turn it in a certain way you would have the impression that you know blood is in the streets, that heads are being bashed in, you know that Antifa is running the show. So it's like I kind of feel like the more of actual reality we can experience unfiltered reality, you know we were talking about what would possibly bring us back to some sort of normal state Reality ain't bad. And kind of coming to understand reality and confronting it, and being present at political moments, physically present, I think is really key.

Speaker 1: 26:22

Oh yeah, absolutely. I got to say I'm practicing what I'm preaching because I'm part of two organizations. One is Station Y Braver Angels. Angels is trying to restore political dialogue with different. You know, I'm just, I'm just between two.

Speaker 1: 26:34

You know the red and the blues, even intro, because you know the different tense within the party. You know, I just say this simply, but there are many tense in both parties. There is a conservative and there is a moderate Republicans and if a Democrat is more the progressives and you know conservative Democrat or just a moderate, ok. So even even within the party there is fighting and there's even, you know, and I like that they're tackling those, those issues. So I'm talking to a lot more people of the left and the right. But since I'm in New York, it's a lot more easy to find blues. I mean, let's be, I mean, I'm being brutally honest more easy to find blues. I mean, let's be, I mean I'm being brutally honest. Yeah, I like more reds to join as a, as someone who's who's, who's who's, uh, you know, uh, a gray. Well, I'm just gonna say purple here, because when you mix blue and red you get purple.

Speaker 2: 27:17

Yeah, that's my politics overall well it's, you know it's interesting. It's interesting, though, you know, if you go back, if we go back to a third term and and the washington book. Um, you know, the founders actually didn't want political parties at all. You know, there's one of the Federalist Papers is specifically against the formation of political parties, and it's interesting to ponder what was it they were trying to steer us clear of, and I think perhaps they're trying to steer us clear of lack of thought. Right, when we get folded into these sort of groupthink situations, where we stop and analyzing the situation for what it is and just kind of go along with what the party line is, that's when I think we start to kind of develop a certain cynicism and a certain kind of I don't know, you know lack of intelligence with respect to politics. I also think that you can disguise a lot more wrongdoing. If you kind of have a team, you know that always say go team, you know, and if you're not with our team, you're against our team, and you know.

Speaker 2: 28:18

That's one of the things in a third term that I keep trying to emphasize in the book is that you know you could say what you will about Washington as a slave owner. He was a slave owner. He was a person of his time, but he was a person of character and he was a person who had very strong beliefs about the way the world worked beliefs about the way the world worked. You might not agree with them, but he was somebody who had character and who was prepared to defend his character. So I think that, in a way that when parties get so automated, you know the whole question of character disappears and you know it's kind of what we need more than anything. It's just proof of character. Oh, you know great.

Speaker 1: 28:52

Yeah, I absolutely agree. Not going to get an argument out of me on that one. I mean, I absolutely agree. Not going to get an argument out of me on that one. You know it really slows the country's growth that we're dealing with that right now. I mean, the founding fathers were on, you know, they were on point All right, they were right. They were ahead of their times. You know. This is why I got to give respect to the founding fathers. They were ahead of their times.

Speaker 1: 29:12

You may not agree with them because I believe people are the product of their time. I mean, george Washington owned slavery, right? That's a classic example. I mean, well, he owns slavery today? I'm pretty sure he wouldn't. I could definitely bet on that. That was one of his regrets. It's clearly documented.

Speaker 1: 29:26

Okay, you know, and it's just. You know, people are product of their time. That's why I don't try to politically correct. You know more senior veterans of life kind of people I let them talk the way they talk because people are product of their time. This is coming from millennial. Who's anti woke language. Don't, don't, don't use woke language on me. It's just like you could talk it, but don't expect me to go along with our understand you clearly, because I have to study these terms. This will be up to date and you know I'll be a square or a boomer, mentally right. You know, use these internet slang, you know, to be your halfway kids, the gen z's and alphas, you know.

Speaker 1: 30:05

But you know, you know the world is beyond the phone. Okay, and the phone, the phone. When you can never learn everything through the phone, like socializing properly, you have to be out there to do that. Yeah, social media will give you tips, but it's so fragmented. They'll give you at best, at very best, step one and then then your attention span a shot that you can't pay attention to. A not even a 10 minute video give you more substantial cases on that. You need to do things yourself out there. You know everything's beyond the phone. Is the phone a great tool? Of course is, but the way we use it is very irresponsible.

Speaker 2: 30:39

I remember when I was researching Goodbye Phone, you know, and I think, as you say quite rightly, it is a tool. It is a great tool. When it ceases to become a tool is it when it makes us into tools and it would makes us into sort of passive agents in all of this. So, yeah, I mean it's and it's been interesting, actually it's been interesting being on a flip phone for these years. I do own an iPhone that I will engage when I'm on a reporting assignment just because, as you say, it is a great tool. You know you can record with it, you can do video, you do audio. But what I think is actually really interesting is that you know how it is when you're on your computer and you leave your computer, you go out and now you've got your phone and so there's like a seamlessness to the screen world that goes from your desktop to your or from your laptop to your phone.

Speaker 2: 31:40

What is interesting about having done this flip phone experiment is that when I leave the house with my flip phone, the trance is broken, and so when I'm on the subway, when I'm walking down the street, I'm not listening to anything else, I'm not watching anything else, I'm not thinking about something else. I'm actually observing the world as it is and I just wish you know you know people talk about doing like a digital Sabbath or you know a digital digital detox or whatever kind of thing but I just wish that that could become more of a regular thing and you're starting to see it with schools, like more and more schools are making you check your phone at the door, which I 100% support. I teach university and the degree to which I wish I could bend the phone from the classroom I mean I could politely ask, but the degree to which they're sort of half paying attention is really upsetting.

Speaker 1: 32:26

Oh yeah, for first hours I thought it was a bit drastic, but I don't know, I changed my mind and one guest changed my mind very immediately. So, yeah, they're there to learn all that. So yeah, you're right. Before I'm like immediately, they're there to learn all that, you're right. Before I had more iffy positions I said I don't want them to be put away or something. But yeah, I think the phone ban is good, I support it. Before I was iffy, I said yeah, I want to support it, but emergency calls they got ways to do that Sold. You got me in the cap of phone ban. It's not just a please and all of that and people who was against it. Now I will argue against it. No, they're there to learn. Come on, the average human attention span is no better than a goldfish. Worst case, it's even worse than a goldfish.

Speaker 1: 33:06

So I mean come on, there's so much studies about how the smartphone has really altered our brains. I use more graphic it damaged our brains. Okay, to some degree. It's like a drug. You know, drug does all this alteration in our brain wiring and structuring and all that. I mean, you know, this little device here which I'm hypocritically holding. You know, I love it when the one financial teacher I got, which I was fully paying attention to, he got my attention with his crazy personality. This is the weapon of mass distraction. I took it from him.

Speaker 1: 33:39

Ever since I'm taking that I'm taking that from him because, yeah, the you know, we are so distracted we're not learning. Okay, we may be getting, we may be receiving information fast, but we're not marinating it, we're not critically thinking, we're not applying it correctly, we're not doing these higher level thinking that that we could be doing. You know, media literacy, forget it. Um, with ai and all that which actually I'm not going to get to, you know, let me, let me admit the bud, because I that I could go on for another hour with ai that done a lot of ai research.

Speaker 2: 34:04

So you know, it's funny it's funny when I was writing this the third term, you know in the book it's sort of we don't get too far into the method by which washington is summoned. There's a discussion, there's an anomaly that somehow he passes through. But one person said to me, you know, because I'd written the book before the whole AI craziness began. But one person said to me well, couldn't you just reconstruct Washington using an AI? Couldn't you just feed everything he ever said into an AI and then it would produce? And I was like, yeah, but that's not a lot of fun, I prefer the anomaly. And that was frankly also another challenge. When you actually read Washington's letters, I don't think if I had rendered him exactly as he was in the 18th century, I don't think people would really even be able to understand what he was saying, let alone have the patience to sit through everything. You know the lengths at which people like the Lincoln-Douglas debates, which are already 100 years after those, went on for hours, you know, and multiple times, and you read them and the lines of argument are so difficult to follow and the metaphors and stuff. But, as you say, you know we have this force that's actively working on our memories, working against our memories, working against our cognition, working against our ability to reason, against our cognition, working against our ability to reason. You know, you're probably old enough to remember, remember when you, like before the iPhone, and you had a plan to meet somebody for a party, and you're like you saw them at school and you said I'll see you at the party. Well, like now it's like where's the party? We actually had in our abilities to make multiple plans with multiple people, things in our mind, telephone numbers in our minds, addresses in our minds, the exercising of that recall ability all the time, so we never missed the party. So you know it's depressing, but I think the only thing we can do is to try and create these sort of like serengetis of phonelessness in our lives where we can try to reclaim some of that and, frankly, going back to a third term, trying to reclaim the memory of what democracy is, because I think it's another thing that's working on us.

Speaker 2: 36:08

Our present president is brilliant at kind of. He's kind of the iPhone president, he's kind of the TikTok president. He operates in very small pieces of time, whereas somebody like Washington was discursive. He formulated arguments that were based on evidence and rhetoric and all these kinds of great things. You know. Were Washington to come back again and really for real run for president, it would be a difficult contest, that's for sure. Anyway, we're coming to the end of the hour here. Elias. I just wanted to. You know how do you like to wrap things up?

Speaker 1: 36:35

Oh yeah, no sure, sure. Well, I only got one more question. It's a very simple one.

Speaker 2: 36:39

What's the?

Speaker 1: 36:39

reaction in your book Positive, negative, any reactions?

Speaker 2: 36:46

to you. So generally it has been really positive. And, as I mentioned, I've been on libertarian shows and MAGA shows and very left-wing shows and everyone kind of gets the joke. You know what I mean. That this is, you know, it's kind of an emperor's new clothes situation where the tyrant is, advisors are saying well, you know, you know, we're not. The polls are split, they don't. People are saying they're not sure if it's real and the tyrant says, well, what if it is real? You know what if the guy's saying what he's saying, what do we care if he says what he's saying and one of his aides under his breath says if he says, if he is who he's saying, who he is, he's the fucking founder of our country and he's a brick shithouse full of kryptonite. But you know, that's the sort of unmooring that this president does to all of our history. So anyway, to your question.

Speaker 2: 37:43

People like it. I get the occasional Amazon review. That's clearly just a MAGA person who hasn't even read the book, who gives it the inevitable one star and I'm like, ok, that's the way it goes. But you know, I wish that everybody of every political stripe would, would take this, at least read the first 10 pages. Give it a shot, because I didn't really come into this with a real ax to grind. I came in with a joke to tell to some degree, and you know, see if you find the joke funny.

Speaker 1: 38:09

You know maybe a little historical lessons and reminders of why you know we are a democracy, not a monarchy. Exactly.

Speaker 2: 38:16

Exactly.

Speaker 1: 38:16

Exactly, exactly, exactly. That's all I'm going to say. I can collaborate, but get the book. Read the whole thing. I'm going to be more aggressive than him. Read that book, all right, I'm sure you could afford it, okay.

Speaker 2: 38:30

Yep, it's available on Kindle. It's available on Amazon. If you Google a third term and my name, paul Greenberg, it'll come right up. Well, on Amazon, if you Google a third term and my name, paul Greenberg, it'll come right up. You can buy it at your independent bookstore. It's out there everywhere, and we're actually going to drop the audio book in about two weeks. So if you like to listen to stuff rather than read stuff, it'll be there, and I've even commissioned a screenplay, so maybe you might be seeing George Clooney play Washington someday.

Speaker 1: 38:49

Oh, look at that, even a screenplay. Look at that Read the book or listen to the book first before you get to the screen, like I know some of y'all. Y'all so visual, so spoiled. We got to reclaim our basic human intellect, literacy, memory, democracy. Fill in the blank with a positive answer only. That's right. One of those wrong answers only.

Speaker 2: 39:15

Right To paraphrase spike lee fight the forgetting exactly, exactly, exactly, all right eliza was great to spend time with you. Good luck with the show and, uh, you know, um keep, keep doing the good work that you're doing now.

Speaker 1: 39:26

Thank you so much. Well, again, I'm gonna put all that in the description in the at the episode right there. All his you know his links his website. Well, they don't got that much but Medium right there, which is probably the first time I've ever advertised it. Well, it's the first time for everything Reddit's going to pop up at some point, which I don't agree with. Don't do Reddit. Reddit will destroy you. It destroys your mental health.

Speaker 2: 39:54

All right, I got to bounce, though, but nice to see you'll be. I look forward to listening to it.

Speaker 1: 39:59

Take care, all right no problem, take it all right. So I could just do this part all alone right now. So now let's do a shameless plug in for my podcast. So, once you complete this audio or visual journey, give a like, share, subscribe. Give a honest review on apple podcasts. Avoid spotify to give it. Give an honest review on Apple Podcasts. Avoid Spotify. If you give the review on Spotify, I will ignore it and share this. Share this with whoever think a benefit from it. I mean, I had a great conversation with him, as you can tell and then, if you want, give a donation as well $3 a month, access to old episodes and I'm thinking putting some exclusive content soon. Okay, so whenever you complete this episode, you have a blessed day, afternoon or night. Thank you.