Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with NPR International Correspondent Eyder Peralta; Interview with Former Mexican Foreign Minister Jorge Castaneda; Interview with Paralympic Champion Oksana Masters; Interview with "Erasing History" Author Jason Stanley. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired September 09, 2024 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
Thousands take to the streets in Mexico, opposing sweeping judicial reforms. With a new president set to take power soon, what's at stake? I
asked NPR correspondent Eyder Peralta and Mexican former foreign minister Jorge Castaneda.
Then --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OKSANA MASTERS, PARALYMPIC CHAMPION: We are athletes. We belong here. We belong to be seen. And, you know, it's so hard to dream and become
something when you don't even see that it's possible.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: -- a story of resilience and hope as a summer of sport wraps up in Paris. My conversation with Paralympian Oksana Masters.
Also, ahead --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JASON STANLEY, AUTHOR, "ERASING HISTORY": In order to realize the Democratic ideals of freedom and equality, we need to know who has been
denied equality and why.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: -- "Erasing History." Author Jason Stanley talks to Hari Sreenivasan about his latest book exploring the worst authoritarian
movements of today.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Bianna Golodryga in New York, sitting in for Christiane Amanpour.
In Mexico, democracy and rule of law are under the spotlight. Thousands are protesting against highly controversial judicial reform plans that would
require judges and magistrates to be elected by popular vote. Critics say the changes would weaken crucial checks of power and threaten democracy.
President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has pushed the proposal along, and it now goes to a final vote in the Senate on Wednesday.
In three weeks' time, the president, also known as AMLO, will be stepping down, and giving way to Mexico's first female and first Jewish leader,
Claudia Sheinbaum. Although supportive of her predecessor, she could potentially inherit a country in flux. Whatever happens in Mexico could
have direct effects on its northern neighbor.
And with immigration among the top concerns for American voters as the November presidential election approaches, what will be the fallout?
Joining me now is NPR's correspondent, Eyder Peralta, from the Senate in Mexico City. Eyder, welcome to the program. You have been covering this
process since the beginning, and obviously, these protests have only been growing. For those around the world that are just reading and learning more
about these reforms, explain what they entail exactly.
EYDER PERALTA, INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT, NPR: So, the reforms, this is an epic fight between branches of government. And basically, the reform
does a lot of things. It lowers the salaries of judges. It puts in a kind of a committee that will oversee the judiciary, which is appointed by the
executive. But the huge change here is that judges here in Mexico will now -- or if this passes, will be elected.
And the way it works right now is judges have to work their way up the judiciary and they have to pass exams. They have to first work in the
district courts, and then they move their way up to be appointed to judges. That can take decades. This reform lowers the age limits for judges. It
also means that, say a judge on the Supreme Court will now just have to run for office, and that is how Mexico will stack its federal judiciary.
GOLODRYGA: So, given the fact that the Morena Party has a supermajority in the lower house, a near supermajority in the upper chamber, is this likely
going to be the rule of law within a matter of weeks?
PERALTA: The ruling party says they have the votes, but what you're seeing behind me is an effort to try and convince 43 senators to vote against this
reform, and that's what it will take. What we understand is that the ruling party is missing one vote, and this morning they are saying that they have
that vote. So, what they're saying is that at latest, mid-month, this will be the law of the land.
[13:05:00]
GOLODRYGA: Just to give our viewers some more in-depth to what you've already laid out, under the current system, the judges and court
secretaries, they basically have to work their way up to being appointed. With these new proposed changes, virtually anyone with a simple law degree
and a few years of experience in, quote/unquote, "judicial areas" can become judges through popular vote.
In fact, if too many candidates actually register to run, the final contenders would essentially be chosen by putting their names into a hat
and drawing out of that hat. If AMLO is saying that this is necessary to address corruption and other concerns, which are legitimate issues the
judiciary is facing, how is this the remedy? What is his justification for this process specifically?
PERALTA: Look, I think the way the president, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, describes this reform -- or describes the judiciary, is that it's rotten
beyond any sort of functioning, right? You know, he says that, right now, big businesses and the cartels, the organized crime control this judiciary.
And what he says is that this reform would make judges accountable to the Mexican people.
I think one thing that's actually very important to note is that this is what the presidential campaign that we just had in Mexico was all about.
Claudia Sheinbaum, who is President Lopez Obrador's protege, she went to every sort of rally and she explained, she told to the Mexican people,
look, we need to reform the judiciary, and this is the way we're going to do it. She explained this reform bit by bit. And once the elections came,
the Mexican people gave Morena Party a super majority.
And so, what the president is saying right now is, this is exactly what the Mexican people voted for. The judiciary, on the other hand, says that this
will make the judiciary even more corrupt. And what is more -- I think when you talk to constitutional experts what they say is that really, no liberal
democracy does this. Bolivia did it and it didn't work. Mexico actually used to do it in 1857.
And then when the framers wrote a new constitution in 1915, they said that what electing judges did was that it put the judges in control -- or that
it put the executive in control of the judges, and they called it an aberration in 1917. And they started selecting judges much the same way
that the United States appoints judges.
GOLODRYGA: And it's not just legal scholars and academics and intellectuals who are warning about the outcome of this new law, it is
business leaders, it's the United States government, it's Canada, it's the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it's Human Rights Watch. How much of
this reflects on AMLO's protectionist policies and tendencies and specifically, as it results to international businesses in Mexico?
PERALTA: Look, I think we often forget that Mexico, the United States, and Canada are the biggest market in the world, and they have a free trade
agreement. And what the United States and Canada are saying, in fact, what some of the judiciary workers behind me are saying is that passing this
reform would put into jeopardy that very important free trade agreement. Why? Because a lot of these trade disputes, a lot of these business
disputes, are decided by the Mexican federal judiciary.
And at the moment, big businesses have -- they actually have trust in the judiciary, and they say that this reform will cause chaos. We should note
that if this reform passes, it's going to take a few years for us to see the consequences of it.
The members of the Mexican Supreme Court will get elected next year if this reform passes and then it starts -- the judges from the other lower courts
will begin to be replaced afterwards. So, it's going to take many, many years for us to see the effects of this reform if it passes.
GOLODRYGA: If it passes, there's a high likelihood at this point that it will indeed. We also know that among those protesting are judges in Mexico
themselves. Eyder Peralta, thank you so much for joining us. Really appreciate your reporting.
And for more on these reforms, let's bring in Mexico's former foreign minister, Jorge Castaneda. Jorge Castaneda, welcome to the program. So,
you've heard the conversation we just had with Eyder. Every new elected government has their own views on political issues. And so, my first
question to you is, it's one thing to disagree with certain policies. I know that you view this as a threat to the country at large. Explain
exactly how.
[13:10:00]
JORGE CASTANEDA, FORMER MEXICAN FOREIGN MINISTER: Well, for two reasons, Bianna. And thank you for having me. The first is that electing judges is a
lousy idea. If anybody thought it was a good idea, it would be done in many, many countries.
There are some states in the United States that do so, but all federal justices or judges in the United States are appointed and then ratified by
one branch or another or one house or another. And of course, the Supreme Court in the United States is appointed by the president and ratified by
the Senate. It's a lousy idea. No other country does it except Bolivia, as Eyder was saying. And even that hasn't worked out at all.
But most importantly, Bianna, the problem here is that the way the candidates for the Supreme Court will be nominated is through committees
made up from both houses of Congress, the executive and the judicial branch, which means the deck will be stacked. The dice will be loaded. Only
candidates that are close to the governing party, Morena, which has super majorities, as you said, in both houses and, of course, the executive with
the new president and through the existing Supreme Court and other mechanisms, they will be able to basically appoint the new Supreme Court,
which then voters will, in fact, ratify instead of really choosing. So, what this means, it's the end of an independent judiciary in Mexico.
Now, this judiciary has been corrupt, it is true. It's ineffective. Very few crimes in Mexico are either punished or sentenced. All of that is true.
Judicial reform is necessary in Mexico. But this is the worst possible judicial reform mainly because it does away with the dependence of the
judiciary branch.
GOLODRYGA: So, what is the more effective judicial reform in your view? And I'll follow that up with, is it your view that AMLO is using this
justification as a ruse to put forward his own protectionist policies or do you think that, in his mind, he actually does think that he's proposing
solid reforms?
CASTANEDA: Well, on the first question, the point is that most people believe that what's wrong with the Mexican judiciary system is the public
prosecutors themselves at a -- on federal level and at a state level, what United States are called district attorneys, state attorneys, or the
attorney general and the Department of Justice. That's where the problem really begins.
So, there are reforms that should be carried out with judges and perhaps even the Supreme Court, although it was already reformed in 1994, and most
people, except AMLO, of course, believe it has done a good job. Now, the main point here is that this is part of an authoritarian power grabbed by
AMLO himself. This is not the only reform that is up for approval this month in Congress or after October 1st.
For example, this is all -- there is already a bill put forward with constitutional changes to eliminate Mexico's independent or autonomous
agency, the Federal Competition Commission, the National Transparency Agency, which is freedom of information, the Federal Telecommunications
Agency, and several more. He's eliminating all of those.
He has also suggested he wants to eliminate the Federal Election Council, which will be then incorporated into the government. Everything that Mexico
has done in terms of democratizing the country over the past 30 years, he wants to roll back. And he also wants, for example, to put an end to
proportional representation, congressmen, which would lead to his party having not just a super majority, but practically the totality of members
of Congress in the lower house.
So, this is not just a judicial reform, it's part of a broader package, which clearly indicates an authoritarian drift in Mexico, which is what
worries so many people.
GOLODRYGA: As you mentioned, this has received pushback not only from scholars and intellectuals, but also from foreign governments, including
the United States. I'd like to play sound for you from the U.S. ambassador to Mexico, Ken Salazar. We do not have sound, but I'd like to say for you
what he -- his response has been, because he's rarely spoken out on internal domestic policy issues within Mexico. But here's what he said
about the judicial reforms. He said, based on my lifelong experience supporting the rule of law, I believe popular direct election of judges is
a major risk to the functioning of Mexico's democracy.
[13:15:00]
What impact or significance of the U.S. ambassador speaking out on this specific issue? What does that have, if at all?
CASTANEDA: It made -- had a major impact, Bianna, for two reasons. One, because Ambassador Salazar has rarely spoken out or criticized AMLO. He's
had a very close personal relationship with him. And many people have said, including articles in The New York Times, that he was closer, perhaps, to
the Mexican government than to the American government that he represents in Mexico.
But secondly, because this is the government of the United States speaking, and it's not the personal opinion of Ambassador Salazar, as respectful as
that may be. This is the opinion of the U.S. government, which has a free trade agreement called USMCA with the -- with Mexico and with Canada. And
the government of the United States as well as several congressmen and senators in the United States, as many -- as well as many businesses in the
United States seem to consider that the elimination of the independence of the judiciary branch in Mexico will be a violation of this treaty, which is
up for review in 2026.
So, this is not just an idle comment made by the ambassador, this is the official position of the United States government on an issue on which it
has something to say because of the existence of this treaty and of course, the fact that Mexico is the United States main trading partner in the
world.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, and USMCA, we should note, was enacted during the Trump administration. That withstanding, do you think that there could be a
calculation on AMLO's part that if Former President Donald Trump is re- elected, that perhaps he wouldn't view this particular law as negatively as the current administration does?
CASTANEDA: Well, he might think that, but first of all, I think it's very difficult to predict what Former President Trump believes about this law or
that law. I think, if anything, whether it's a virtue or a vice, it's up for Americans to decide. Unpredictability is one of Former President
Trump's strong suits.
GOLODRYGA: It's an evergreen, yes, to any issues.
CASTANEDA: I wouldn't be betting on that either way, but I think what is true is that regardless of who is elected in November in the United States,
these are very important interests that are involved in Mexico and the judiciary branch is a very important part of USMCA, because a large number
of issues of disputes that exist normally between countries, between businesses, et cetera, are settled in the domestic courts of each country.
Mexican disagreements are settled in U.S. courts occasionally, Canadian courts and so forth, and many American disputes are settled in Mexican
courts. If those Mexican courts are considered not to be reliable, not to be transparent, not to be independent, to be increasingly corrupt and
captured by organized crime, by the way, as Ambassador Salazar himself said, that is a problem for trade, it's a problem for finance, it's a
problem for all Americans, and it's a problem for the United States government.
GOLODRYGA: If this law is enacted, and as we know, Claudia Sheinbaum, who is AMLO's protege will be sworn in October 1st, how does she navigate this
issue? She has been closely aligned with AMLO but not as close as he has been on this issue itself. Do you see that she has any potential wiggle
room around it or no?
CASTANEDA: Well, I mean, the first thing is that she must be very confused by this insistence on AMLO's part in having this ratified this month of
September instead of giving her the chance as of October 1st to perhaps modify it, weaken it, dilute it, postpone it, suspend it, whatever. He is
trying to ram this through in the last couple of weeks of his presidency before she comes to office. So, that's a problem for her.
Secondly, this is already having a discouraging effect on foreign investment in Mexico. The peso has weakened severely over the last couple
of months. There is money leaving Mexico as we speak, and this is something that she would not have wanted to begin with her administration with.
Now, how much wiggle room does she have? Very little if this is actually approved on Wednesday as they're said and as you have mentioned, Bianna. If
it is, this is the law of the land, but it's not just any law, it's the constitution. These are constitutional amendments which will be very
difficult to reverse if they are passed on Wednesday. And she will not pass necessarily be very comfortable with them, but she'll be stuck with them
either way.
GOLODRYGA: Let me ask you about another democratic crisis unfolding in the region, and that is in Venezuela, where the opposition leader, Edmundo
Gonzalez, has now fled to Spain, seeking asylum. Every analyst that we've spoken with has said this really puts the United States of all western
countries in a box in terms of how it responds now. But what -- I'm curious, what, if anything, should be Mexico's public stance to this?
[13:20:00]
CASTANEDA: Well, I would like Mexico to have a very critical stance regarding the elections and the way President Maduro has manipulated them
in a fraudulent manner. Unfortunately, Mexico has not done that. I wish Mexico had a position similar to that of the United States, of the European
Union, or even of leftist President Boric in Chile. It's not just the conservative presidents in Latin America who have been very critical of the
election. I wish Mexico would.
And Mexico carries a great deal of weight in Latin America in general because of its size and its economy, but also, because it has a tradition
of foreign policy, of espousing noble causes. And certainly, this is a noble cause. That election was stolen by Nicolas Maduro from Edmundo
Gonzalez. A large number of foreign countries, and specialists, the United Nations, the OAS, the Carter Center have all said so.
GOLODRYGA: Yes.
CASTANEDA: So, Mexico should follow Chile, for example, and be as critical of the elections as Chile has been.
GOLODRYGA: Jorge Castaneda, thank you so much for your time. Good to see you again.
CASTANEDA: Thank you, Bianna.
GOLODRYGA: Well, another issue plaguing Mexico is gender-based violence. The U.N. says 10 women are killed every single day there. But this crisis
is not unique to Mexico, it impacts millions of people around the globe.
Just before the Paralympics came to a close, athletes and spectators paid tribute to Olympic marathoner Rebecca Cheptegei. She died from severe burns
last week, days after her boyfriend allegedly doused her with fuel and set her on fire. The Ugandan runner had just returned home after competing in
the Paris Olympics last month when the attack happened. Her death has brought renewed attention to the problem of violence against women.
Correspondent Amanda Davies has more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
AMANDA DAVIES, CNN SPORTS REPORTER (voice-over): A grieving mother struggling to come to terms with the unthinkable.
AGNES NDIEMA-CHEPTEGEI, MOTHER OF REBECCA CHEPTEGEI (through translator): She was a good child. Very polite. And she didn't have a lot of issues. I
just don't know.
DAVIES (voice-over): According to police, Rebecca Cheptegei, a Ugandan athlete based in Kenya, was attacked by her boyfriend, who doused the 33-
year-old in petrol before setting her alight at their home near the City of Eldoret.
Sadly, though, this is not an isolated incident, just another that highlights the ongoing issue of gender-based violence and femicide in
Kenya. According to government data from 2022, 34 percent of women in the country report having experienced physical violence after the age of 15
committed by anyone with married women at particular risk. And a number of athletes have been victims.
JOAN CHELIMO, ATHLETE: We didn't know that there was gender-based violence.
DAVIES (voice-over): Joan Chelimo competed against Cheptegei in the marathon at the Paris Olympics and is one of a group of athletes who co-
founded Tirop's Angels in 2022 in the wake of the killing of Kenyan Olympian Agnes Tirop.
CHELIMO: Agnes was my friend. You could not tell what she was going through because every time you could see her, she was just smiling. We felt
like it was a wake-up call for everyone.
DAVIES (voice-over): Tirop's Angels provides counselling and support to victims of GBV and aims to educate and empower young women in the region.
NANCY LAGAT, ATHLETE, TIROP'S ANGELS, KENYA: As more people came to us and report issues of GBV, we realized that it is a pandemic that is affecting
everybody in our community and especially the whole country.
CHELIMO: Iten is a very small community. It has around 10,000 people. About 2,000 of them are athletes. And what happens is young girls come here
after school, after high school or after primary school and they end up being taken advantage of. We knew -- we heard about GBV all over the world.
But setting up the foundation, more women came up, speaking up about what they are going through in their lives. Not only athletes but also the
community.
DAVIES (voice-over): Amnesty International Kenya launched a campaign in January calling for the country's government to prioritize the
investigation and prosecution of femicide cases. A campaign that goes on, but sadly not enough to prevent the death of Rebecca Cheptegei as her
family and the distance-running community come to terms with another of their members taken too soon.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[13:25:00]
GOLODRYGA: A devastating loss and a stark reminder that more must be done to tackle gender-based violence. Paris mayor Ana Hidalgo has announced that
the city will honor the memory of Rebecca Cheptegei by naming a sports facility after her.
The French capital's summer of sport came to an end over the weekend with a powerful Paralympics closing ceremony. One of the inspiring athletes
bringing home gold is Oksana Masters, who adds two medals to her collection, putting her total at 19 across the summer and winter
Paralympics. Born in Ukraine with birth defects thought to be linked to the Chernobyl disaster, Masters was adopted and moved to America, where sport
allowed her to heal from years of trauma. I caught up with Masters from Paris, just after she scored two golds in two days.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: Oksana, welcome back to the program. Look at you. Those two gold medals look amazing on you. Quite an accomplishment. Congratulations.
Talk about this incredible experience that you've had in the Paris Games.
OKSANA MASTERS, PARALYMPIC CHAMPION: Oh my gosh, this has just been -- I feel like I've just been living on cloud nine. There was so much anxiety
leading up to Paris and so much self-doubt. I was freaking out on the start line. Didn't feel like I was ready. And then, my team just said, you know
what to do. And I had no expectations of two gold medals at all. I just was hoping for at least one in a time trial. And this is just -- I don't know
what happened, but I exceeded my expectations.
GOLODRYGA: This is your second gold medal in Paris that you just won in the H5 road race. And you talk about self-doubt. I'm wondering if that
stemmed from the setback you had right before these games, you broke your finger. And that is a critical finger that for you, one of your dominance
in the sport back in Canada. Can you walk us through what happened and how you helped set yourself right to ultimately win the gold?
MASTERS: Yes, I definitely -- I -- even if I had legs, I would just be a klutz. I'm always falling and breaking things. And especially in skiing,
that's what happened. I was a qualifying race and I fell and damaged my hand really hard. And I knew the pain was not good and it was bad, but I
needed to finish that race. And by me finishing that race meant really damaging it.
And I had three surgeries that kind of were not sticking and making the repair really challenging. And it was my middle finger, that's the
strongest finger I have. And because of my lack of mobility and dexterity in my hands, it's my thumb, because I do not have it. And so, when I break,
it was that finger I break. And I had to relearn how to not only ski, but specifically Paris, get ready for that and redesign a grip where I would be
able to break with my pinky instead.
And I, honestly, am so lucky because I had my partners with Toyota and TRD that customized a grip for me where -- and spent all the time of trying to
make it fit like a glove and where I'm not focusing and having confidence in my equipment, because this course and the road race ended up being so
sketchy because it's very technical. A lot of steep 15 percent downhill grades and it was raining on top of it.
So, I just -- did not -- that's why I did not think it was possible. And I am just so thankful to have an incredible team around me to help me be the
best out that I can.
GOLODRYGA: And despite all of those setbacks and hurdles, it's, yes, perhaps some luck, but it is your grit, it is your determination, it is
your sheer just sportsmanship and talent that is clearly been your driving force throughout your career as an athlete.
And let's just remind our viewers of how unique you really are in the sense that you played over four summer and winter disciplines. So, it's not just
one sport that you're great at. You started at rowing, skiing, and now cycling as well. Do you have a favorite?
MASTERS: Well, if I was picking my favorites based on tan lines, it would be rowing for sure, not cycling. I'm one of those people that I'm hiking up
my jersey when I'm four hours into my ride of making sure my -- the tan lines fade, and I don't have that strong jersey line, but they're all so
different. I love them all, honestly. It's really hard to say.
But I think because rowing was my first sport and where I learned about Paralympics and kind of started seeing power within my body instead of
focusing on what I didn't have, it's kind of my favorite.
GOLODRYGA: And the power in your body, let's just talk about your story.
MASTERS: Actually, it is my favorite.
[13:30:00]
GOLODRYGA: This is -- what is your favorite? OK. You're on the record now. We have you on tape. Let's talk about your extraordinary story. I was
fortunate enough to speak with you a year and a half ago when you wrote your book, "The Hard Parts."
You were born in Ukraine. Obviously, you've had several physical setbacks as a child there, largely attributed to what many believed was the tragedy
of the Chernobyl nuclear incident. You were raised in an orphanage up until the age of seven, when you were adopted by your mother and brought to the
United States, you were born with six toes, webbed fingers, no thumbs and legs that were missing weight bearing bones. Ultimately, you had them
amputated in the United States. And it was really sports that really helped you overcome so many of these emotional and physical setbacks to bring you
to where you are right now. Talk to us about how you were introduced to sports.
MASTERS: Yes. I mean, sports has been a huge instrumental, like, it's just huge in my life and it's helped me not only get stronger and healthier, but
helped me emotionally heal the wounds that people do not see in the scars that do not see. And then, also, start regaining power and strength within
my body after the amputations.
I definitely did not think -- I'd ever saw anyone like me being an athlete at all. So, I didn't think it was possible. And I just -- I don't -- like
I'm just so lucky that my mom was -- when we moved from Buffalo to Louisville, Kentucky, she introduced me to the world of sports. And in so
many ways, she saved my life by adopting me and saving my life there. And then, she also saved my life by opening the door of sports and then sports
was that -- I feel like that third thing that really saved my life and gave me that purpose and belonging of an identity of who I am and that I belong
in this world. And then that kind of transformed to helping that next generation or that young little girl who also feels lost and doesn't know
where her place is in this world based on the things that her disability is visible or not visible.
And for me, like, I just can't imagine life without sports. For me, my mom opening up that door. And rowing was that first one where I started
processing everything for me and started growing as an athlete and growing as a person. And next thing you know, it transformed into seven Paralympic
games.
GOLODRYGA: And 19 overall medals.
MASTERS: I don't know how that happened.
GOLODRYGA: Here you are today. One thing that stood out to me that you said the last time we spoke was that you had never seen anyone that looked
like you representing Team USA. That really stood out to me at the time. You just said something along the same lines, right now. Why was that such
a pivotal moment for you? And what message are you hoping to send to other girls watching?
MASTERS: I just -- really the message I want to send home to young girls and people with disabilities, but also as games gear up towards L.A. 2028
is that we are athletes. We belong here. We belong to be seen. And you know, it's so hard to dream and become something when you don't even see
that it's possible.
And it's so important to make our sports, all of our sports, be visible, all of the ways that -- to do sport as a Olympic and Paralympic athlete.
And it's just -- I didn't know where I, like I said, belonged in this world. And so, it's hard to look after something and believe that it's
possible and attainable if it -- if you don't see it, and you have to see it to believe it and then to then achieve it and do it.
And that's what I'm hoping that by me showing my legs and being authentically myself and sharing all the parts of my journey, not just
these pretty ones where I get to sit here at the gold medals, but also the hard ones too, because it's all part of the journey and the process that
help us be the athletes we can be. And leading into L.A., more visibility on Paralympic athletes. And specifically, females with disabilities in
sports, that's my passion, is growing that and growing my field of cycling and getting more women involved in sports because we belong here. We're
fierce and we know how to fight.
GOLODRYGA: Have you seen progress along those lines from London to Tokyo, obviously Beijing, given that you do both summer and winter discipline
sports and now, Paris. Do you see progress along those lines?
MASTERS: I do see a lot of progress along the lines. And, you know, Paris actually has done a really good job with nearly equal gender of male,
female metal opportunities and slot allocations, and there's still a lot of room to grow, especially in my sport of paracycling and road cycling
specifically, but it's so reassuring.
[13:35:00]
We're on the right path. And, you know, where every year at home, the -- we're hitting record coverage of the Paralympic Games with -- within NBC
and so -- in Peacock and all these different networks to stream. And I can't wait to see what L.A. is going to bring, because I think that's going
to be a huge pivotal shift for the Paralympic movement and Paralympic athletes.
GOLODRYGA: What are your goals? I mean, what more can you accomplish? Obviously, more medals. But in terms of goals that you continue to set for
yourself what goals are there that we can expect to see from you in Los Angeles?
MASTERS: Well, honestly, I'm just chasing that perfect race. That's the one thing that I didn't really feel like I'm so lucky to race my way two
gold medals here, but I feel like I didn't race that perfect race where I just nailed every part and would not change anything about it. And
ultimately, as a competitor and as an athlete, that's what I'm really chasing is that perfect race.
GOLODRYGA: Are you really?
MASTERS: That ends me on the podium or lands me on the podium, or -- yes.
GOLODRYGA: Are you really that tough on yourself that you -- the two gold medals later, you still say you haven't had the perfect race?
MASTERS: Absolutely. I think, you know, just because it's gold medals around my neck, it's -- for me, it's not the position and the number next
to your name. It's that -- it's something I feel inside where before I know what medal and position, I am at the finish line, I want to know I would
not change one single thing and be proud of that race. And I'm proud of the races I did here for sure, for sure, but tactically and just in those areas
where my weakness is, I want to perfect them to have that perfect race.
GOLODRYGA: Oksana Masters, thank you so much for the time. It has just been a thrill to watch you continue to succeed and earn medal after medal
after medal. And best of luck. We can't wait to see what L.A. is going to look like.
MASTERS: Thank you so, so much.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: She's amazing. Well, as democracy is threatened around the world, our next guest warns that danger lies closer to home, at school. In
his latest book, American philosopher Jason Stanley argues that attacks on education empower authoritarian regimes by reshaping our understanding of
the past. And he joins Hari Sreenivasan to discuss.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HARI SREENIVASAN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Bianna, thanks. Jason Stanley, thanks so much for joining us again. Your recent book, "Erasing
History," starts with a quote from Vladimir Putin, that wars are won by teachers. Explain why this quote, what does he mean, and why is it so
significant?
JASON STANLEY, AUTHOR, "ERASING HISTORY": So, what our schools do and our textbooks do is they give us a vision of history that allows us to make
judgments about policy. In the case of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the textbooks that Russians are brought up on do not represent
Ukraine as having an independent history. They do not represent the Ukrainian language as genuinely separate language, and they erase the
history of genocide that Russia directed against Ukraine in the 1930s, Holodomor.
And so, Russians are brought up thinking that it's just not true that Ukraine is an independent country. And they're brought up thinking that
it's offensive to Russia that Ukrainians claim they are an independent country. And so, that for them justifies the full-scale invasion of
Ukraine.
Also, the Russian textbooks represent Russian incursions, invasions, really, into neighboring countries like Georgia and Ukraine as justified by
a supporting in pro Russian independence movements. So, all of that justifies the ideology of the full-scale invasion.
SREENIVASAN: How does that translate beyond Russia to other countries and then will get to the U.S.?
STANLEY: Well, in the case of, for example, Nazi Germany, it happened very rapidly to the Weimar Republic was not flooded with anti-Semitism. But the
Nazi textbooks emphasized the so-called stab in the back myth that Jews somehow betrayed Germany in World War I. And so, it wasn't a military loss.
It was a betrayal.
And so, by the time the late '30s came around, Germany was the most anti- Semitic country in Europe. So, we think -- we see this actually -- this process happening actually relatively rapidly. And one might wonder whether
the youth support for MAGA republicanism comes from the already changed curricula in southern states, for instance, we're seeing more youth support
for Donald Trump.
[13:40:00]
It may be, this is just a speculation, that we're already seeing the effects of the attack on education in many states.
SREENIVASAN: Let's talk a little bit more about that. Expand on this attack on education. How -- I mean, look, you are an expert on fascism. You
are an expert on how cultures and societies, you know, slowly drift from one ideology to another. What troubles you about what you see in American
education today?
STANLEY: So, in a democratic society, you want an education that gives citizens agency. It represents social movements that realize the two great
democratic values of equality and freedom. When you erase the history of social movements. For example, as they did with Jim Crow, when they erased
the agency of black Americans from the Civil War -- from before the Civil War, like slave rebellions, through to the Civil War and beyond, then
you're representing black Americans as lacking the agency to fight for their own freedom and equality.
When you erase the history of social movements, you're representing hierarchy as permanent and unchallengeable. And that's what we're seeing in
U.S. education. Instead of democratic education, we have patriotic education. We have the glorification of great men. And that idea is that
it's not social movements rising as it were from below that make democracy more perfect, but -- that realize democracy, but instead the, great deeds
of individual men. And then, you're removing the agency from people that's required for democracy.
So, that's the first element that worries me. You're representing history as the deeds of great men. And so, why would people join social movements?
Secondly, you're erasing the history of the dominant groups' oppression of non-dominant groups. So, you're -- in order to realize the democratic
ideals of freedom and equality, we need to know who has been denied equality and why. When you erase that history and instead promulgate a myth
of national innocence and national greatness, well, then you can't repair the inequalities of the past.
SREENIVASAN: I mean, the former president was recently at an event for Moms for Liberty where he was implying that kids just went to school, and
several days later came back with gender surgeries. I mean, well, you know, that's in a hyper political and a campaign environment, but what are these
things -- how do they inform your thinking about how this sort of creep happens?
STANLEY: Toni Morrison made the point that liberty too often in America means liberty for essentially white Christian men or whites. Moms for
Liberty fights to eliminate black history because they don't want their children to feel guilty about the past.
But whose children are made to feel not guilty here? Whose children are, as it were, rescued from -- by this confrontation from history? Well, it's not
black children, because black children, by not knowing the history -- black history, by not knowing -- by not being exposed to the consequences of Jim
Crow, the consequences of redlining in the mortgage industry, for example, which is why many black Americans didn't inherit houses, cheap source of
wealth of white Americans, by not learning that history, they will feel badly about their family. They will think that their ancestors were somehow
lazy for not for not accruing wealth.
So, this is -- so, it's what's meant here by liberty, what's meant here by not making children feel the weight of the past is white children. What's
meant is boys, because they're not learning what's meant is heterosexuals, because they're not learning the history of LGBT, how LGBT was suppressed.
Now, two things about the focus on trans children. First of all, there's a tiny minority of America who are trans. So, it's the perfect scapegoat.
It's the perfect scapegoat because it's not a real voting population. So, you want a scapegoat that doesn't affect a significant voting population.
And trans Americans fit that.
[13:45:00]
Secondly, fascism, fascist ideology, which is what we're seeing, is based around natalism. It's based around rigid gender roles. The idea that women
should bear a lot of children, and men should father those children.
Trans identity violates rigid gender roles. And this goes back in history to the original fascist movements. The National Socialists targeted Magnus
Hirschfeld, a gay a gay German Jew, who is the director of the Institut fur Sexualwissenschaft that had the largest photographic evidence of gender
variability, as well as 20,000 volumes of LGBT literature, literature representing LGBT perspectives.
And this whole collection was burned in the first in the first Nazi book burning in 1933. This is highly reminiscent of what we're seeing now when
we see any evidence of gender variability removed from libraries and schools, when we see LGBT perspectives removed from libraries as there were
libraries and schools.
And I ask again, Moms for Liberty wants to eliminate any representation of LGBT perspectives from schools. Think about how this makes LGBT children
feel, or children of same sex parents. This makes them feel terrible, weird, freakish.
Moms for Liberty is all about not making our children feel badly. Well, what does our children mean here? The Toni Morrison point is that liberty
and Moms for Liberty just means heterosexual white people.
SREENIVASAN: How does this escalate up? Right now, we've also had, you know, politicization of the protests that are happening on campuses while
simultaneously there is also an attack on the types of material that is allowed to be taught on college campuses. We see, you know, maybe it's
economic reasons, maybe it is cultural reasons. There might be a lot of factors. But we also see kind of an attack on just the idea of the
humanities or liberal education.
STANLEY: So, let's begin with the attack on universities. That is the canary in the coal mine of fascism. Central European University was ejected
from the country of Hungary by Victor Orban for teaching gender ideology. We're seeing this imitated point by point by American autocrats like Ron
DeSantis. So, autocrats know that dissent and critique comes from universities. They know that student movements are often central parts of
social movements for democratic change.
Look at Bangladesh, what just happened in Bangladesh. Student protesters overthrew the autocratic leader of Bangladesh. That's the kind of thing
that that autocrats, authoritarians, those who want to build a one-party state are afraid of. They're afraid of student movements. What we've seen
is we've seen nonviolent student protests protesting American funding of a genocide in Gaza, protesting Israel's aggression in Gaza. These are antiwar
protests. So -- just like the Vietnam antiwar protests.
And then, we have moderate liberals joining the right-wing authoritarian forces in cheering on police, militarized police going on campus and
confronting anti-war protesters. And this concerns me greatly because when the left and the center left, the liberals, are separated and at each
other's throats, then the autocrats and authoritarians when history tells us this.
So, what we have here is an attack on universities egged on by moderate liberals, egged on by newspapers like The New York Times. And that is
exactly what authoritarians want. If you look at India, for example. In 2019, there were large scale student protests for Muslim equality against
the Citizenship Amendment Act. These were nonviolent protests supporting Muslim equality. They were represented as anti-Indian, and there was a
harsh militarized reprisal to these protests.
[13:50:00]
So, this idea that universities -- critique that universities make of patriotism and nationalism and student movements for equality are somehow
anti-national is very familiar from authoritarian movements, and that's exactly what we're seeing here. We're seeing a wind up to what if Trump
wins the use of militarized force in against protest.
We're also seeing a very developed attack on the greatest university system in the world. The United States has the greatest university system in the
world, and the Republican right is dismantling it with the help of what Martin Luther King called the moderate liberal. Florida has essentially
dismantled tenure. Ohio and Indiana are essentially dismantling tenure with politicized tenure review. The AAUP, the American Association for
University Professor Report on Florida is terrifying.
And let me conclude by pointing out a fundamental element of authoritarianism. Authoritarianism is all about creating a culture of fear.
And that's what these attacks on schools and universities are doing. They're creating a culture of fear and intimidation for anyone who
criticizes the nationalist ideology that the far-right is promulgating.
SREENIVASAN: How does Project 2025, which Former President Trump has tried to disassociate himself from, how does it tackle the idea of educational
institutions in the United States if President Trump is re-elected?
STANLEY: So, we've got an attack on federal funding for universities. And we have the elimination of the Department of Education. Now, that's a long-
standing goal of the conservative movement. So, to eliminate the Department of Education and deal with its civil rights, it's jurisdiction over civil
rights equality.
So, once you eliminate the Department of Education, you don't really have monitoring of what's going on in states. You don't really have moderate --
have monitoring that there's not discrimination against minority groups. That's a longstanding goal of the Republican Party.
SREENIVASAN: You write that history in a democracy is not static, not mythic, but dynamic and critical. Explain that.
STANLEY: A democracy requires a constant critical engagement with the past and the present. Because the democratic ideals of freedom and equality are
never perfectly realized, but a democracy is a dynamic culture that tries to realize them more and more, tries to broaden the scope of freedom and
broaden the scope of equality.
Equality in a democracy means political equality, and that means all of us play a role in the formation of the laws that govern us. If we don't play a
role in the formation of the laws that govern us, then we're not a democracy. But you can't play that role if you don't know history. You
can't play that role if you don't understand how history impacts the present. You can't play the role of changing laws to make up for the
tendrils of history that suppress certain groups in the present.
SREENIVASAN: You know, right now, in Germany, in the eastern part of the country, a far-right group for the first time since, really, Nazi Germany
has come back into power. And I wonder if that is an anomaly, if that is part of a trend. What do you see?
STANLEY: Well, it is sort of an imitation of what's happening in the United States, right? I'm not saying it's an explicit imitation, but it's a
-- it mirrors what's happening in the United States. Alternative fur Deutschland wishes to change the education system and change the monuments
and sculptures. They want Germans to be proud of their history. They want to reduce the stigma of the Third Reich and National Socialism.
Well, this is exactly what's happening in the United States. People are saying, well, we don't want students to feel to feel ashamed of U.S.
history. We don't want black children to learn, black and white children to learn that our founders were enslavers. We just want them to learn the
positive aspects of our history.
[13:55:00]
SREENIVASAN: The new book is called "Erasing History." Professor Jason Stanley, thanks so much for joining us again.
STANLEY: Thank you, Harry.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: And finally, down in San Diego, dozens of dogs hit the waves for this year's canine Surf-A-Thon. Taking to the water in goggles and life
jackets, can't forget those, all in the name of a good cause. The proceeds will go to the annual host, the Helen Woodward Animal Center. How they get
goggles on those dogs. That's an amazing accomplishment.
Well, that does it for now. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. And remember, you can
always catch us online, on our website, and all-over social media. Thanks so much for watching, and goodbye from New York.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
