The End of Global Order: A Conversation with Peter Zeihan and Ian Bremmer (Episode  

Conversation starts at 7:55

32:10 Peter's prediction on Russian oil pipelines not lasting long was absolutely spot on whearas Ian's suggestion that Russia would later bring them online to enter European market could not have been far from reality today. Yes, both of them had great insights, but Peter's predictions are hitting the nail so often it really makes you terrified of what the future of the world has in store for us.

Best episode in a long long time. I have listened to Zeihan in several podcasts and found it always very interesting. The idea of adding Bremmer here to spar with him and add nouance and perspective makes it an exteemely valuable conversation. Well done

I'm a big fan of both Ian and Peter. It was really cool hearing them hash it out a little bit. Paid for a month of podcasts just to listen to this, please bring them back!

Please make the full conversation available!

As fascinated as I am by Zeihan's work, it was really great to hear counterpoints to his assertions that come from a position of mutual respect.

Only yesterday I thought “I wish Zeihan and Bremmer would be on a podcast.” 👏👏

One of the most insightful, alarming, and clear headed podcasts I’ve heard in a long while.

I would like to see a return to this after the developments over the last couple of months

Such a good podcast, one of the best. Thank you for bringing Ian on to challenge some of those ideas instead of just interviewing Peter. Made for a much much more insightful podcast

Zeihan is a stud. I watched a bunch of his lectures. He knows what’s up.

Yesssss! You finally had the Z man on! He’s a must have!

Fun talk! I love that Peter is willing to consider any outcome that the data leads to- the other guys are a fun counterpoint but they don’t have a competing argument- just a reluctance to see how much things might change

Very pleased that this conversation took place. Sam and Peter have both had a major impact on my worldview.

Sam and Peter are two of my favorite thinkers. I'm looking forward to this. Especially after reading there are counterpoints. I don't accept everything Peter (or anyone) says as a matter of course but I appreciate his very data driven approach to geopolitical strategy.

Enjoy good faith debates that are civil as well as substantive. I side with Peter, having just read his excellent book.

This episode alone -- a civil and enlightening debate between two of the three best geopolitical analysts (the other being George Friedman) -- is worth a year's subscription to the podcast, which I signed up for to hear the second half.

Best Guest (along with Ricky Gervais) you've had in 288 episodes !!

Yassss! Peter Zeihan and Sam! Amazing

Awesome two of my favorite people to listen to....Sam and Peter this should be super interesting!

Starts at 7:54

I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Zeihander and I've always wondered how PZ would fare in a debate format like this. He seems to be a bit flame-happy towards opposing viewpoints, but I was glad to see he (as well as Ian Bremmer) kept things constructive and good-faith. Kudos to Sam Harris for putting this together and moderating it so evenly. I think that pretty much any round could have been expanded out into an 4-hour lecture, so there is a very long list of points where I wish Sam would have probed both guests more deeply. But I know that Sam Harris's forte is boiling down large & complex topics to easy-to-consume points.

My two favorite people to listen to, Peter and Sam!! So cool

Great interview. Keep them coming.

Didn’t expect you people doing a podcast together, that’s awesome!

Making Sense is the opposite of Waking Up.

*Didn’t know Peter was on the Making Sense pod recently! This is going to be exciting!*

This was great Sam. Thanks. It’s also something that has to be listen to again and again. As usual-spreading it far and wide.

Podcast of the year.

Wow Harris picked up Zeihan. Impressive.

Great stuff!

I’m so excited that more and more people are coming to know Peter’s work. He is maybe the one one person who can predict what will go on in geopolitics this century.

Wow my three favorite brains all in one podcast!!

love peter's work, bought two of his books and its refreshing - even though the picture is grim - to have politics backed by rather objective and uncontroversial information

The opening music alone sets a somber mood.

Thanks

I listen to as much from Zeihan as I can, but I'm not obligated to agree with everything he says. However, his data is excellent, and deserves close attention.

Three of my favorite people on the same pod.

Ziehan is a amazing geopolitical thinker

Do more of this stuff Sam.

17:55 That line from Peter was so snarky and out of left field, that really could have been a Sam Harris line. :,D Jokes aside, I've really went down the rabbit hole in the last months and Peter Zeihan was one of my most viewed people on the topics of geopolitics. I searched a bit on the internet and didn't see any Sam Harris and Peter Zeihan conversation, so the fact that this episode with Zeihan's name popped up two days ago, is really exciting!

Incredible stuff

"Humans are funny. They are like caterpillars who have become conscious of their condition and believe that their purpose is to extend caterpillar life and improve caterpillar living conditions. " -- some guy I met on the street

The problem is, if I start listening to this I will have to pay for the second half so I'll rather skip this, even though I would like to listen to it as i just don't have the financial means at the moment.

Finally, a podcast worth listening to. I was frankly surprised with the latest selection of topics, which seemed a bit out of touch with current affairs.

This is gold

Sam, this is easily the best podcast you’ve done. These are the two guys I follow for geopolitical info. Much better than say Mersheimer

now that was interesting and certainly needs a #2 in the future.

Yes!! No one like Zeihan. Can we get him on Rogan next??

Videos available? Or audio only?

Oh yes. Thank You.

I've read all of Zeihan's books and I've been listening to a lot of podcasts with him over the last few months but this is probably the best one so far.

Sam and Peter are my top two favorite thinkers.

Fantastic

Peter is a geopolitical God !!!!!!

Great interview. Sam Harris, we’re thinking about anything but Bad Trump? It’s great to see you talking about something else. Especially with Peter Zeihan! Thank you, what great interview, and discussion.

Wow what a great charity campaign 🤯💯

love listening to Peter very good guests

Peter was right.

"The times they are a'changing..."

Do not argue with anyone in private, (you will not convince them) argue in public to convince others.

This sounds like the glass half-full vs half-empty argument. Either way, we end up with half a glass. It will depend on your own personal outlook as to which argument you give more weight to.

Peter’s confidence realized in his soft spoken manner strengthens his positions. He has nothing to prove, rather his reasoning is simply solid and intelligent. Clearly Peter’s positions are superior. The winner of the debate.

Nice to see Sam's podcast growing a bit. Wish the intro music would change - it's like the X-files! Creepy. But whatever. :-) Always appreciate the conversations.

Dude... Where is the video feed? What year is this? 1994?

Accurately predicting the future seems like an almost impossible task, even for smart and knowledgeable people. There are so many different factors, and the functioning of the world is so complex. Maybe the caldera under Wyoming will blow tomorrow, and the whole show will be over.

Hopefully they take out the elites first

Refreshing. Civil discourse.

Can someone give me a summary of this ?

Stunned by German diversification. I'm shocked they relied on Russia for anything to begin with.

If Peter Zeihan is correct, at the very least for Gen Z and Alpha, they will have an interesting time, so they at the very least won't ever be bored

Follower and fan of all 3. Loved this. But Peter needs to upgrade his mic game now that he’s an internet rockstar

I would love to see Peter debate Ray Dalio!

Sam as a moderator works extremely well

I absolutely LOVE this podcast. I practically worship Peter. I feel like he is a real ORACLE. You made a brilliant move having these two guests being on at the same time. I mean, all of us want to know the future and I think Peter gets me closer to know that more than any other individual. Companies using him for consultation are immensely intelligent in their choice. Thank you forever!

As Leibniz put it: “If an ontological theory implies the existence of two scenarios that are empirically indistinguishable in principle but ontologically distinct ... then the ontological theory should be rejected and replaced with one relative to which the two scenarios are ontologically identical.” In other words, if a theory describes two situations as being distinct, and yet also implies that there is no conceivable way, empirically, to tell them apart, then that theory contains some superfluous and arbitrary elements that ought to be removed. Leibniz’s prescription is, of course, widely accepted by most physicists today. The idea exerted a powerful influence over later thinkers, including Poincaré and Einstein, and helped lead to the theories of special and general relativity. And this idea, Spekkens suggests, may still hold further value for questions at the frontiers of today’s physics. Leibniz’s correspondent Clarke objected to his view, suggesting an exception. A man riding inside a boat, he argued, may not detect its motion, yet that motion is obviously real enough. Leibniz countered that such motion is real because it can be detected by someone, even if it isn’t actually detected in some particular case. “Motion does not indeed depend upon being observed,” he wrote, “but it does depend upon being possible to be observed ... when there is no change that can be observed, there is no change at all.” In this, Leibniz was arguing against prevailing ideas of the time, and against Newton, who conceived of space and time in absolute terms. “I have said more than once,” Leibniz wrote, “that I hold space to be something merely relative.” Einstein, of course, followed Leibniz’s principle when he noticed that the equations of electricity and magnetism make no reference to any absolute sense of motion, but only to relative motion. A conducting wire moving through the field of a magnet seems like a distinct situation from a magnet moving past a stationary wire. Yet the two situations are in fact empirically identical, and should, Einstein concluded, be considered as such. Demanding as much leads to the Lorentz transformation as the proper way to link descriptions in reference frames in relative motion. From this, one finds a host of highly counter-intuitive effects, including time dilation. Einstein again followed Leibniz on his way to general relativity. In this case, the indistinguishability of two distinct situations - a body at rest in the absence of a gravitational field, or in free fall within a field - implied the impossibility of referring to any concept of absolute acceleration. In a 1922 lecture, Einstein recalled the moment of his discovery: “The breakthrough came suddenly one day. I was sitting on a chair in my patent office in Bern. Suddenly the thought struck me: If a man falls freely, he would not feel his own weight. I was taken aback. This simple thought experiment made a deep impression on me. This led me to the theory of gravity.”

When two of your favorite thinkers/smart people are on the same show.

Three of my favorite people on the planet doing one podcast. How great is that? To Peters point… Apple is moving out of China and into Vietnam.

I love it when my worlds collide (Sam and Peter)! Haven’t felt that way since Dan Carlin was on Sam’s podcast way back when. I note Peter’s view of the world is in stark contrast to Ray Dalio’s. Be interesting to see which of these brilliant thinkers has it right.

for a current perspective: I am a Mexican who is currently had a career boom because of instability in China, Peter's data driven perspective with Geographic knowledge has been pretty spot on. Take a bigger look at where (US, European and Japanese) Companies have been investing in love

listening to this 6 months later more and more of peters insights are coming true

Am surprised… wef not even part for conversation… I forgotten it’s safe and effective..

Ian Bremmer is optimistic about common interests with China like climate change. It's a WEF bubble, China doesn't care about that at all. They do business with Russia as never before.

The concensus seems to be that a population which isn't constantly getting larger is a problem. Instead of allowing it to burn out by excessive unsustainable growth, an intelligent race would self moderate its population growth to maintain sustainable limits.

Necessity is the mother of invention.

Peters famous head set mic 🎙

I think zeihan is probably closer to where the world ultimately ends up. The timing and specifics of his predictions are probably not as accurate.

I wish I was as certain about anything as Zeihan is about everything. Many of his “predictions” seem more like conjecture, or extrapolation at best. I prefer Prof. Bremmer’s more nuanced & studied analysis and rational optimism any time.

Fast forward to 8:00

This is one of the thinking I look at Universal Basic income as a solution to both get the best of globalization and the middle class...

29:00 I guess that plan to use Nordstream 1 as a leverage just went off the table.... Any changes in your forecasts?

Less consumption is exactly what we need to have any chance of not totally ruining the planet. I don’t see how it will be bad to have less people. Chasing infinite growth with finite resources is always going to fail. The system is the problem.

I’ll subscribe Sam when you admit you suffered TDS. And that intellect didn’t make you immune from propaganda.

History tells us unless there is a major war things don't just change overnight they tend to peter out over years and though I agree with a few of Peters points I just don't see the (relatively) instant catastrophe he predicts. The good thing is it won't take long to see who is right.

Ian Bremmer, also a World Economic Forum member. Funny that wasn't placed in his little bio in the video description.

Probably the most interesting podcast I've heard in years.

Peter sounds a lot like John Hamm, which is fun to imagine

The end of order? Perhaps the end of an order, or a period of relative order... forget not the constant struggle between the apollonian and dionysian tendencies of human and humankind. One extreme in ascendancy inevitably pushes us in the opposite direction.

I lived in China a few years before covid, they're great and everything but ill prepared for the information age and there are a few things about the culture that hold them back. It's almost depressing how no cultures have figured it out, but the thought of cherry picking the best aspects of cultures worldwide makes me feel better.

Ian was absolutely wrong about Germany.