George Soros on The Age of Fallibility (partial transcript, part 3)

[Kragen Javier Sitaker]

(Continuation of the two previous parts posted on kragen-fw previously;
this completes the series.  I finished writing this 2007-02-25; I don't
know why I hadn't gotten around to posting it)

(Starting at 2912 seconds at 15:19)

RUCHIRA DATTA: Um, so my question is not about the War on Terror,
but, uh, I actually have two questions having to do with your roles as
a financial trader, a philanthroper, and someone who's been involved
in the transition in Eastern Europe.  Uh, so one question is that the
basis for capitalism, uh, is supposed to be Homo Economicus, who
pursues rational self-interest, and then the Invisible Hand makes
everything work out; so the first question is, what is your view of
the relationship between altruism and capitalism; and, uh, the second
question is, uh, we've heard a lot about the ills of a repressive
government versus an open society, um, so what is the use of
government at all?  Or can society just be sort of self-organizing?
Those are my two questions.

SOROS: Well, let me take it the other way.  I think the answer is no.
I think that you can't avoid, uh, uh, a need for government.  Uh, and
actually, you know, market fundamentalists argue that you leave it to
the markets, let people make, make their own decisions, and, uh,
everybody pursuing their self-interest will serve the, the common
interest.

It's a nice idea, but is unfortunately --- or fortunately --- false.
Uh, because markets are only designed to allocate resources among
competing private needs.  They are not designed to take care of
collective, common needs --- and that requires government.  You see,
that is what requires government.  Including maintaining markets!  If
you didn't have regulators, financial markets would, would collapse!
So you do need government.

And I think, coming to your first question, I think that, uh, being
concerned with the common good is a, is a, is quite a rational thing
to do.  So I don't see it as being in any way, uh, in conflict with
rationality or even Homo Economicus.  And if I decide to use my money
for philanthropy, uh, you know, that is one of the elements that come
--- that come, I spend money, and it, it's, it can be accomodated in
the, in the market system.

So I don't see a problem, but, but, I think, and I think that
philanthropy can, you know, do some good, but to think that private
philanthropy could replace the role of government is a false idea
also. And actually in my philanthropy, we very much strive to
influence the way the government spends money.  So let's say we
support afterschool, which is a very good thing.  But we couldn't
possibly finance, uh, afterschool for every kid in, in America --- that
has to be, uh, public spending.

So we look for matching funds in, let's say, New York City; you know,
now you have afterschool in, in, in most of the schools, because the
city government, the state government, and even the federal
government, also puts in money.

(3147 seconds (235 new seconds), 476 words, and 15:37, so I've spent 8
minutes.  That's a transcription rate of about 60 words per minute,
which is considerably better than I was doing before, and it's about
120 words per minute of video.  Restarting at 15:39.)

RUCHIRA DATTA: Thank you.

SCHMIDT: Let's have uh, two more questions.  I'm sorry, three more
questions.  Four more questions.  (LAUGHTER)  Do them quickly.

SOROS: OK, we'll try to be fast.

UNIDENTIFIED QUESTIONER #6: I wanted to say first, out loud, that,
that I (CELLPHONE RADIO INTERFERENCE NOISE) personally really
appreciate your dedication to this issue; I'm sure that's one reason
why there are so darn many people here; um, I think it's a
tremendously important issue for a lot of reasons, and, uh, my
specific question is, there's been some discussion, well, you know,
even right here today, about the question of persuasion and dialogue
here at home in America.  Um, have you found any particular kinds of
things to say --- you know, soundbite or longer --- that you think are
helpful in talking to people who don't agree with you.

SOROS: Well, unfortunately I can't put it in a soundbite, otherwise I
wouldn't have put it in a book.  (LAUGHTER)

QUESTIONER: Or is maybe just, uh, keep talking and smiling.  (MORE
LAUGHTER)

UNIDENTIFIED QUESTIONER #7: Hi there. Um, uh, some of the things you
said I really agree with; for instance, the, uh, abstract War on
Terror, creating a lotof --- well, it's hurting a lot of innocent peop
--- you said, people, but I think it's also hurting a lot of innocent
abstractions like the Fourth Amendment.  Um, in the, in the name of
the PATRIOT Act and other things which are actually, I think, more
scary to the survival of this nation than anything else in history.

Um.  But there was an implicit comparison that you made between Israel
and the United States and, and maybe, maybe I misheard or
misunderstood, but Israel invading Lebanon in the last few weeks
doesn't seem to strike me as a, as a, as a close comparison or
parallel to the United States going out of its way to invade Iraq.  I
mean, Israel was attacked directly and you may say, well, only two of
its military people were taken, etc., etc., but Israel has been
dealing with a six-thousand-year-old blood feud for a long time, um,
with its older brother, um, or Isaac's older brother Ishmael, so, I
think, my personal take is it's different, but, what's your take on
that?

SOROS: Well, you're absolutely right, and maybe I should have made
that point --- I just, I'm glad that you are bringing it up, so I can
make it.  There's no question that Israel was attacked, and has a
right and a duty to defend itself, and they can't tolerate a, uh,
terrorist or whatever organization on its borders, uh, with rockets
that can, that can disrupt life in Israel.

So there, there, however, you could be concerned that the response is
perhaps, uh, uh, too indiscriminate for Israel's own good.  In other
words, I think it may have been a mistake to, say, hurt the Maronite
Christian, uh, community, uh, in order to disrupt the possible sup ---
road to the supplies.  In other words, you have to be a little bit
concerned with Lebanon!  Because Israel needs a functioning state.
Lebanon is a failed state, and Israel is destroying it further, and
that, I think, is counterproductive.

But that is a different kettle of fish from the invasion of Iraq.  So
I, I, your point is very well taken.

ELLEN SPERTUS: Um, first I'd like to thank you, not just for the big
philanthropy you do, but also the smaller: I volunteered with a small
group, a despised, oppressed group --- prisoners.  And your
organization made a donation to them, and it's made such a difference.

Um, my question, well, I'll preface it by saying that Google aspires
to be an open society where employees can question and criticize
decisions made by the leaders of the company.  (LAUGHTER) We do that
all the time!  One of the most controversial ones has been Google's
decision with China, that in order to be able to have a service that
the Chinese Government won't try to block --- Eric can correct me if
I'm mis-summarizing it --- we agree not to allow searches on certain
words.  And some people --- uh, the company takes the position that
it's better to give the Chinese some, you know, most access, than no
access, while other people think Google's being evil.

I'd like your opinion.

SOROS: Well...

SCHMIDT: You can direct your response to me.  (HUGE LAUGHTER)

SOROS: Well, uh, uh, I would say, uh, two, two things.  Uh, that may
be relevant.  Uh, one: that if you, somehow, it comes up in the, the
search that this, this, um, site is blocked, I think that is, to me,
would be satisfactory information to provide: "At the request of the,
of the, of the Chinese Government."  I think that would be valuable
information for the, for the Chinese, uh, search, people who are
searching.  I think that would be a very, uh, good way to handle it.

Now, how to, how to maintain certain standards; I think that it is
important that the industry establish certain standards and agree to,
to abide by those standards, because otherwise, let's say, Google
might, uh, take a higher, uh, uh, position, and others would undercut
it by providing that service.  So, to, to, here, you need to have
common standards to, to which all the, uh, entire industry subscribes,
and then you can actually maintain those standards.

SCHMIDT: For the record, that's in fact our view, as our employees I
believe all know, um, if a result is censored by the software we've
built, we say that this, uh, entry was rem --- uh, was removed, and we
notify the Chinese end-user that the information is not available to
them by law.

SPERTUS: And our competitors do not.

SCHMIDT: Uh, that is also correct: our competitors do not.  

Um, you have the honor of the last question.

UNIDENTIFIED QUESTIONER #8: Well, then, I'll try to keep it short.

Um, there's another, I think, um, false metaphor that's, that's been
used, and has been misused, which is the War on Drugs, comparable to
the War on Terror that's been used for other purposes other than what
it's, you know, nominally intended to fight.  Can you do, can you see
what, do you draw, see any parallels?

SOROS: Yeah, I do, I do see the parallel.  And it's ironic that when I
established an American branch for the Open Society Institute, that
was one of the first issues we took on: the War on Drugs.  Because,
because the War on Drugs is doing more harm than drugs themselves.  It
doesn't mean that drugs are, are, are, are okay.  Or, they do, uh,
cause a lot of damage.  But the War on Drugs has caused a lot more
damage.  So actually that was one of our first projects.

And little did I know that I would be waging war on the War on Terror,
uh, ten years later.

QUESTIONER: Thank you.

SCHMIDT: So, so, with that, um, it's a great honor to have you here.
Um, in your lifetime, which will go on for a long time, I suspect, you
have changed markets; you have changed societies, uh, in many ways for
the better, I think a lot of people give you very strong credit for
your role in opening up literally the end of the Cold War, bringing a
lot of things that were worries of my generation to a point of
peacetime, and I think we all wish you good luck.

SOROS: Before you applaud, let me just correct you on that --- again!
(LAUGHTER) I'm sorry, I, I really appreciate it, I've really enjoyed
this conversation, but I can't change markets.  I'm sorry...

SCHMIDT: Do you know...

SOROS: I can anticipate markets...

SCHMIDT: Do you know where I got all my information?  From Google!

SOROS: Oh. Okay.

(HUGE LAUGHTER)

SCHMIDT: Thank you very much.

(APPLAUSE)

END CREDIT:
Produced by The Creative Media Department
Copyright Google 2006

(Done at 16:20 with 1341 new words at 3719 seconds, 572 seconds more,
in 41 minutes of work.  That's 33 words per minute of work, and 140 words per
minute of video.)