Return to Transcripts main page
Amanpour
Interview with "The Heat Will Kill You First" Author Jeff Goodell; Interview with "Blitz" Director Steve McQueen; Interview with The Atlantic Staff Writer Tom Nichols. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired October 10, 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]
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, and welcome to "Amanpour." Here's what's coming up.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. RON DESANTIS (R-FL): We will better understand the extent of the damage as the day progresses.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: After Hurricane Milton, the cleanup and the damage assessment begin. We bring you the latest on the ground in Florida and look at the
bigger picture with author and environmentalist Jeff Goodell.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEVE MCQUEEN, DIRECTOR, "BLITZ": I wanted to focus on -- you know, on the normal people that are left behind rather than the soldiers and so forth.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: Academy Award winning director Steve McQueen on seeing war through a child's eyes in "Blitz," a World War II epic with haunting echoes
today.
And --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TOM NICHOLS, STAFF WRITER, THE ATLANTIC: Donald Trump is trying to return to office with a very clear agenda to become an autocrat.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: -- Hari Sreenivasan speaks with Tom Nichols of The Atlantic who warns Donald Trump is the tyrant George Washington feared.
Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Christiane Amanpour in London. Hurricane Milton has moved out into the Atlantic. After a brutal night, now
comes the rescue and recovery effort, with damage assessments underway. More than 3 million homes and businesses were left without power, while
lives were lost, both before and during the hurricane. The total death toll is not yet clear. And it's not over yet. The heavy rainfall continues as
gusting winds and surging waves still threatened Florida, and rivers could swell to historic high levels in coming days.
With it all, there was some good news from the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. RON DESANTIS (R-FL): What we can say is the storm was significant, but thankfully, this was not the worst-case scenario. The storm did weaken
before landfall and the storm surge, as initially reported, has not been as significant overall as what was observed for Hurricane Helene.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: So, in a moment, we'll get a live report from Florida. Now, Milton represents a one in a thousand-year rainfall event, and it hit less
than two weeks after another catastrophic storm, Hurricane Helene. So, why is this happening? Our first guest tonight, Jeff Goodell, has covered
climate change for more than two decades. He's the author of the bestselling exploration of cataclysmic temperature rise, "The Heat Will
Kill You First." And he's joining us from Asheville, North Carolina, which is still reeling from the aftermath of Helene. Jeff Goodell, welcome to the
program. Thanks for joining us.
JEFF GOODELL, AUTHOR, "THE HEAT WILL KILL YOU FIRST": Thank you for having me.
AMANPOUR: I know that you are there and the aftermath of that hurricane a couple of weeks ago continues, but first I want to ask you to reflect on
what the Florida governor said. In a sense saying that while it was really terrible, perhaps it wasn't as bad as everybody predicted. What's your
assessment from, albeit far away?
GOODELL: Well, I think that's a pretty bold thing to say when your state has been hit back-to-back by two major hurricanes within a couple of weeks
of each other. And the notion that it's not as bad as it could have been, is not as cataclysmic as it might have been is sort of, you know, faint
comfort I think to people who are -- have experienced that and are still, you know, kind of digging out from the debris and taking stock of what has
happened to their lives.
AMANPOUR: What are you noticing in terms of, as they say, the damage assessment is underway, the recovery or the rescue, if possible, are
underway as well? What are the areas that strike you as the most at risk and dangerous right now?
GOODELL: Well, I mean, I think -- you mean -- do you mean areas of the country or what do you mean by at risk?
AMANPOUR: No, what Milton has done. Because we hear that there are some maybe retirement homes and areas that have been surrounded. There was a
sort of a mobile home encampment, if you like, that has been -- you know, the very vulnerable have, as usual, taken the brunt of it.
GOODELL: Right. You know, I think that's one of the things that's, you know, going to be revealed today as we -- officials dig through the debris.
[13:05:00]
You know, one of the things about these kinds of events is that, you know, in my book, I call heat a predatory event. And in a certain way, hurricanes
are also. There are people who are most vulnerable, who, for a variety of reasons, can't leave, who are living in substandard housing perhaps, who
are older, who are frail, who have other kinds of vulnerabilities. And these are the people that are at risk, and that's always the way it is in
these kinds of extreme weather events. And that's what makes them sort of so heart rending because people who have means get out and people who don't
stay behind and take the risks.
AMANPOUR: And, Jeff Goodell, referring to what you were just talking about, your specialty, your investigation on the cataclysmic and
catastrophic heat, we read that most hurricanes generally sort of slowly build strength as they churn out from the ocean onto land.
But the string of recent ones has really been very rapid. They have morphed rapidly from storms into terrible hurricanes. We understand that there was
a sort of a heat wave impact on Milton. It had gathered in the Gulf of Mexico. What can you tell us about how the heat impacted this hurricane?
GOODELL: Well, I think I want to frame it by saying, you know, one of the important things that's kind of difficult to understand about what's
happening with climate change is that, you know, we are creating an entirely different planet, a different climate by our continued burning of
fossil fuels and putting CO2 into the atmosphere.
The old rules don't apply in this new climate. And that goes for extreme precipitation. It goes for heat wave events. And specifically, it's going
in the case of this kinds of hurricane that we're seeing, in this sort of rapid acceleration. That rapid acceleration is a very clear reason why, and
that is because the Gulf of Mexico is about three to four degrees hotter than average temperatures for this time of year.
And the reason it's three or four degrees hotter is because our planet is several degrees hotter than it's been before. And that heat is absorbed in
into the gulf. And hurricanes are essentially heat engines. They work off the differential between the upper atmosphere and the temperature of the
water. So, the hotter the water is the more exploration you have in these hurricanes. And that's why, as our (INAUDIBLE), as our oceans get hotter,
we're going to see more and more of these bigger, rapidly spinning, rapidly accelerating kinds of more destructive storms.
AMANPOUR: So, we've seen certainly not hurricanes, but very destructive storms and huge rainfall and precipitation that, of course, floods across
Europe, across the world over the last several months. And I want to ask you though, back home, in where you are, the tornadoes that everybody
experienced in the danger zone overnight.
Obviously, there is Tornado Alley in the United States. But were the tornadoes foreseen? Because some of them, you know, apparently, were from,
you know, before even Milton was created.
GOODELL: Yes. Well, tornadoes are a common occurrence when a hurricane makes landfall. That's not unheard of. Again, what's new and different here
is the scale and scope of these tornadoes. And that's something that, I think, hurricane experts and climate experts will be looking at in the
coming weeks and months, which is the consequences of these bigger storms and their ability to spin off tornadoes.
But you mentioned, you know, the extreme rainfall events in Europe and other places around the world. And, you know, there's a very basic, you
know, physics reason for that, which is that, you know, hotter air carries more water. It has a capacity to carry more water vapor. For each degree of
temperature warming, it holds -- the air holds about 7 percent more water.
So, you get these bigger, more intense rainfall events, even in that -- like Milton, we're seeing that there was a lot of rainfall. In the U.S., we
had Hurricane Harvey a few years ago, which was basically this tremendous rainfall event that had huge damage to Houston, and we've seen it all
around the world with flooding in Pakistan and other places. So, these extreme precipitation events are very much a creation of climate change.
AMANPOUR: There's also been, I mean, you know, a really exponentially large problem about disinformation to the point that the president of the
United States has had to call it out. He called out the swell that's coming from Trump comments on FEMA. Also, Marjorie Taylor Greene, she's talking
about, you know, people controlling the weather.
[13:10:00]
This is what Biden said yesterday, just before Milton made landfall.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, U.S. PRESIDENT: They're saying that money needed for these crises are being diverted to migrants. What the heck are they talking
about? Stop it. It's outrageous. It's just not true.
Now, the claims are getting even more bizarre. Marjorie Taylor Greene, the congresswoman from Georgia, is now saying the federal government is
literally controlling the weather. We're controlling the weather. It's beyond ridiculous. It's so stupid. This got to stop.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: What does that kind of public disinformation do to individuals who are trying to figure out to the general science and politics and
mitigation of climate change? These guys know exactly that the federal government is not controlling the weather. So, what's the point?
GOODELL: The point is to sow division, to increase distrust of, you know, science and federal agencies, to try to do everything to make Kamala Harris
look bad. I'm surprised. I did -- Marjorie Taylor Greene didn't say that Kamala Harris personally controlled this hurricane with, you know, a kind
of game controller or something.
I mean, these kinds of things are just outrageous. You know, I've been writing about climate change for decades. I've covered a number -- you
know, maybe a dozen or more hurricanes, I've never seen anything like this before in.
In these kinds of events what usually happens is people come together, or they all get together. They, you know, focus on relief, on aid, on
rebuilding, not on blaming and dividing. And I think it's just emblematic of what Trump is trying to do in American politics right now, which is to
stoke this kind of division and do everything he can to create chaos because, you know, his politics thrive on chaos.
AMANPOUR: And -- but, you know, it's at a time when you have said that just the entire global infrastructure just about is not up to par for this.
You wrote an op-ed for CNN, writing recently that, quote, "We have built our world for a climate that no longer exists." You've talked about bridges
expanding, power outages, et cetera, et cetera, which we just saw.
How big an issue is that, the building of a world for a climate that no longer exists? Can one, in fact, mitigate that infrastructure reality that
we have right now?
GOODELL: Well, I mean, to be blunt about it, I think that's going to be the project of the 21st century. I mean, is rebuilding our world for this
new climate. It's going to happen one way or another, either in this sort of Mad Max destructive way, or in an intelligent forward-thinking way.
But the fact is, you know, our world, whether it's storm drainage or, you know, building it on coastlines or like, where I am here in North Carolina,
along rivers and things, whether it's highways, whether it's water systems, dams, things like that, they are built for the climate that existed in the
20th century, the climate that many of -- that you and I, and many of the viewers here, I'm sure grew up in.
AMANPOUR: Yes.
GOODELL: But the climate that we're in now is entirely different. It is more extreme. There's going to be more extreme events and we are not ready
and we need to -- the project will be for the next decades will be rebuilding our world to make it ready.
AMANPOUR: Yes, and the proof is in front of us as we see what's happened, and it didn't even ask you about the ongoing Helene, you know, recovery and
-- that you're experiencing there in North Carolina. Jeff Goodell, author of "The Heat Will Kill You First," thank you so much.
Now, Correspondent Isabel Rosales is on the ground in Tampa, Florida, and she's joining us from there right now. We can see you. Well, we could see
some video. Isabel, tell us what is going on where you are.
ISABEL ROSALES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right. I am in Hillsborough County in this area that's known as Upstate. And I am in a SHERP. This is an
amphibious vehicle that is able to get into floodwaters like this.
And let me show you something. You see that? The Great American Assisted Living Facility. This is the site of a major rescue operation this morning,
where Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office deputies and fire rescue rescued 135 people that were stuck in there, because you can see that this has been
-- this is a one-story structure.
This is an area that was not under evacuation orders. This is an area that normally does not see flooding like this. But what happened was all of that
torrential rainfall just wouldn't stop and kept pouring and adding on to it. And then it led to flash flooding, leading to a situation where those
people that a lot of them using wheelchairs, bedridden, on medication, on oxygen had water coming up to their knees, a very scary and dangerous
situation.
[13:15:00]
And they waited there for hours until conditions were safe for deputies to get out here and rescue them, get them out of here in a vehicle exactly
like this.
But this is what's left of the community. Just incredible floodwaters. We've seen those who didn't need immediate rescuing get out by literally
waiting through this water, putting their children on their shoulders, and that's how they've been able to get out of here. Taking a pair of shoes, of
couple of items of clothing. This is incredibly devastating and not something that they anticipated.
I don't know if you can see through this corner here, but we're about to approach an apartment complex. And you'll see them just hanging up here on
the second floor. We've waved to them. They're OK. They don't need help right now. So, they've got to decide how do they get out of here, right?
Either they hunker down in there or they have to tread through these waters to exit out of here.
So, just an incredible, stunning sight from this area that nobody anticipated.
AMANPOUR: Yes. Yes. I mean, I'm looking there. I mean, to an extent, they say -- because we had the Tampa City councilor on last night, and it was
going to be the worst hit, right? Tampa was kind of the eye of it. It appears that it was St. Petersburg. But do you think the people who you're
seeing there, why didn't they evacuate? Was there a reason? Have you been able to talk to people who are still there? Because they clearly got the
warnings very early.
ROSALES: Right. So, we are actually not in an evacuation zone at all. These people were listening to directions. They were not told to evacuate
out of here. This is an area inland, not by the water at all.
AMANPOUR: Oh, wow.
ROSALES: They weren't supposed to evacuate. And that is what has been a stunner. In fact, to that assistant living facility that I mentioned,
people evacuated from Bradenton. That is just above Sarasota, the area that got really got hit hard, they evacuated here. Those patients evacuated here
thinking that they would be OK.
I spoke with the sheriff here. The sheriff, Chad Chronister of the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office. This is where he started his career
as a rookie. This area right here, University Area now called Upstate, 33 years ago, and he was in tears because he's never seen anything like this
is what he told me. He says that this is a heavily Latino population. Working paycheck to paycheck. And again, they were following orders. This
is not anything that they would have anticipated. This caught them by total surprise.
And now, they're stuck out here. I mean, can you see this? Waiting in the water right here. I mean, this is their normal right now until these waters
recede. And this is going to take a long time to recover from.
AMANPOUR: We've got a few seconds. You're painting an incredible picture. Your camera people are really showing us exactly what's happening, and it's
an incredible thing to hear that they were in the evacuation zone and had followed instructions.
Just briefly, do you know whether they're able to have food or clean water?
ROSALES: So, I've been told that some of these units actually have power. I can't imagine if they have running water or not. But I will tell you
this, the folks that were rescued out of the assisted living facility, they were helped out, they were given blankets.
AMANPOUR: All right.
ROSALES: They were given food, juices, and then rescued over to a center where they will get more extensive help.
AMANPOUR: All right. Well, Isabel Rosales, thank you so much for being with us. Thank you. And take care there.
Now, to a catastrophe in a different time and a different place, the Blitz. Nazi Germany's ferocious bombing campaign of 1940 and 1941. Over eight
brutal months, some 43,000 people were killed across Britain. It was a time that defined the strength and the resilience of this country.
Now, the Academy Award winning director says Steve McQueen takes a fresh look at the Blitz, telling the story of George, a nine-year-old child
evacuated to the countryside by his mother. But George was not having it. Here's a clip from the trailer.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My mom sent me away.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She did it to keep you safe.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Your son did not arrive at his destination.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You're responsible for his safety. Why can't you tell me, where's my boy?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: And I spoke with Steve McQueen here just before "Blitz" opened the London Film Festival about George's journey and the searing echoes, of
course, for children in war today.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: Steve McQueen, welcome back to our program.
STEVE MCQUEEN, DIRECTOR, "BLITZ": Thank you.
[13:20:00]
AMANPOUR: You have a new film out, "Blitz." And, actually, it's interesting. It plays on some of the World War II, you know, storytelling
you've been doing, the last one with your film director wife, the Dutch artist called "The Occupied City."
What is it that made you want to focus on the Blitz, which seems to be a really well told and well-trodden British World War II story?
MCQUEEN: Well, not really. I mean, there's a few films about the Blitz. I mean, it's always about something else, meaning that I want to focus on the
people on the ground.
I think that in -- usually, with war films, people make decisions and people have to sort of seem to have to survive because of those decisions.
And I wanted to focus on -- you know, on the normal people that are left behind rather than the soldiers and so forth.
AMANPOUR: So, this centers around a mother and her boy. The little boy is just unbelievable. I mean, he just delivers a great, great performance. I
think he was eight when you first cast him?
MCQUEEN: Eight when we first cast him, nine when we -- when he was in the movie. He's never acted before, ever. Yes.
AMANPOUR: It is extraordinary, actually. And so, he is a kid who, like many children in London during the Blitz, was sent away by their parents to
some sort of safety in the countryside. He's also a biracial child. And that is, you know, a significant theme throughout the film.
Tell me a little bit about his name. In real-life he's called Elliott, in the film he's called George. How did you teach him? How did he learn to
play, you know, a boy at war? What did he know about war even?
MCQUEEN: Look, kids are more intelligent than we could ever think of. And I think, you know, again, Elliott, you know, had to deal with who George
was at that time and the sort of racism and so forth, what was going on that time. Elliott knew a lot about racism. He lives now. So, he had an
idea of what that looked like.
But what was wonderful about Elliott, he's had a stillness. Unlike a lot of children are very busy and moving around, but he had a real stillness. He
had a kind of -- really kind of silent movie star quality to him. So, you're interested in what he's thinking and you think you know what he's
thinking, but you're always fascinated with what's going on with him? So, he keeps you on -- focused on the screen.
So, he had that innate sort of, presence. And it was just one of those things where, you know, when you write the script you think, oh, my God,
can I tell this story? Is George, you know -- is he in the world? And Elliott was there.
AMANPOUR: You know, I said, well-trodden story about the Blitz, but actually, I don't think there have been stories, certainly not about black
characters in the Blitz and in London, certainly not about boys or young children in that situation. And you say that he, in real-life knows, about
racism, Elliott probably does, but George didn't.
MCQUEEN: Well, I think he lived it. He understood it. I mean, he was used to it through these circumstances because, of course, he's the only black
child in his neighborhood. So, therefore, it was a very -- there was a lot -- in this -- in the film that you'll find there's a lot of abrupt sort of
-- how he's induced to it is kind of very abrupt and unfortunately, there's a sudden -- you know, again, he's been induced to it in a very unfortunate
way sometimes.
AMANPOUR: Yes, he gets taunted and bullied.
MCQUEEN: Absolutely.
AMANPOUR: And actually, he's taught to politely stand his ground. I mean, what his grandfather tells him as he don't suffer bullies, you know, don't
let them torment you.
MCQUEEN: No, no. All mouth and no trousers.
AMANPOUR: It's just the best line.
MCQUEEN: Yes, yes.
AMANPOUR: And he goes up and he says to those bully boys, you're all mouth and no trousers when they wouldn't -- you know, said you want to fight.
MCQUEEN: Yes. Absolutely, absolutely.
AMANPOUR: It was very profound. And I just want to also play this clip that you guys have let us have. It is with the mother played by Saoirse
Ronan. and it is with Elliott playing George. And it's as she's trying to persuade him that for his own safety, he has to leave her and go to the
countryside.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ELLIOTT HEFFERNAN, ACTOR, "BLITZ": Why can't you come with me?
SAOIRSE RONAN, ACTRESS, "BLITZ": Sweetheart, I told you it's an adventure for children only. Grownups not allowed. But it's going to be great. You're
going to make new friends.
HEFFERNAN: My friends are here.
RONAN: Yes, well, you play games in the countryside. That'd be nice. There'll be cows and there'll be horses.
HEFFERNAN: But they smell. I want to stay with you.
RONAN: Yes, I know. It's only until all this is over, and then the schools will open again, and life will get back to normal, I promise.
HEFFERNAN: Please, mom. Don't send me away.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: It's so poignant. And then, of course, like all children, they can lash out against their parents. And when she put him on the train, he
said, I hate you, mom. And wouldn't even say properly goodbye, and he regretted that.
[13:25:00]
MCQUEEN: Yes. Listen, there's over 800,000 children who evacuated from, you know, cities all over the U.K. to safety. I mean, the whole idea, could
you imagine now of someone letting go their eight-year-old, a six-year-old, a seven-year-old, a five-year-old child to someone you don't know? You
don't actually know where their children are or who the people are looking after them.
So, you know, that trauma, you know, has an effect even to this day, you know, generations of people, you know, stiff upper lip and they'll keep
calm, you know, and carry on, all that kind of stuff. So, there's a -- there was a certain kind of, you know, restraint and sort of certain kind
of a Britishness of, again, you know, not sharing, not -- you know, again, not sort of being vocal about feelings. And I feel that it has a ripple
effect to this day. I imagine what happened with COVID.
So, you know, the ramifications of that period have passed on to generations as well. So, it's a very traumatic time. Of course, we see in
the movie with a child and his mother, but of course, how much effect it has today.
AMANPOUR: This film is coming at a time when it seems like the whole world is on fire at war, whether it's now in the Middle East and with terrible
plight of what's happening to civilians and children there, whether it's happening in Ukraine, the same thing. Do you -- I mean, what do you feel
about this coming out at this time? It's obviously very resonant.
MCQUEEN: Absolutely. You know, art sometimes has -- can echo what's going on now. I mean, this is a film based 1940. But actually, yes, it is about
now. And for me, the in on this time period and war in general was about seeing it through child's eyes and amplifying it. You know, because what
happens in a child's mother and father or parents, wherever they are, are arguing is three times as worse than it actually is. So, you can imagine
with war.
And also, when did we get to a point where we compromise? When did we get to a point and say, well, you know, we looked the other way? With children
is good and bad, it's right and wrong. And at some point, we, as adults, we compromise.
So, the whole idea of seeing this whole conflict through this child's eyes, in some ways is to refocus us, whoever we are, viewers, the public, to, you
know, getting the situation where we can actually, how can I say, be honest about what's going on. And sometimes there cannot be a situation of
compromise. Sometimes there cannot be a situation of looking the other way or turning the other cheek. And because it's not right. And --
AMANPOUR: Well, George, the child, sees that for his own self during the wonderful scene where he is befriended and taken care of by an air raid
warden who happens to be black, from Nigeria, he says, and his name is Ife. But when he steps inside the actual segregation that's going on in one of
those underground shelters --
MCQUEEN: Well, I took from an actual story what actually happened where, Ife, which means love, the air raid warden has to confront racism within an
area where people are sharing a space of safety and people within that safe spaces of safety, people start putting up barriers and divisions, and he
says this is not happening here. Tear it down We are all here to be one. We're -- and we have to set an example because what's happening above us is
someone trying to sort of set another example for us. And if you don't like it, you have to leave.
AMANPOUR: That's what he says, you know, Hitler's trying to show us about identity and what he's doing in the war and we can't --
MCQUEEN: Yes. I mean, it's --
AMANPOUR: Yes.
MCQUEEN: The film is so much also about as much as we're fighting the Nazis with how we fight ourselves, from the very get-go of this pictures,
how we are fighting ourselves as fighting the enemy as such. It's important, you know.
AMANPOUR: And then, in that moment, the young child, George, he says to Ife, who puts him to sleep and says, I'll come back to you, you know, after
your rounds. He's still trying to find his mom. George says to Ife, I am black. And he had never really contemplated that.
MCQUEEN: No, because --
AMANPOUR: He was really proud of Ife.
MCQUEEN: Yes, because all that he's seen and all that has been said to him since before he met Ife is that black is bad, that it's not something to be
a part of or it's seen as, you know, in the most disrespectful way. So, when he sees Ife as a shining light of a black man with integrity, of
course, he wants to be that person. So, it's a good example.
AMANPOUR: Yes, it is a great example. And then, the other thing I wanted to ask you, what were the demographics in London at that time? Because
generally, as I say, when you watch a film about the Blitz or whatever, it's all, you know, essentially monochromatic English people with the same
accent and --
MCQUEEN: That wasn't the case in Central London. I mean, you know, as Joshua Levine, a historian, who was involved in the making of the film, you
know, Central London was kind of cosmopolitan to a certain extent. Absolutely. Large Chinese community.
[13:30:00]
There were the -- there were three black clubs, for example, off Seven Dials in Central London. Now, this is in the '30s and the '40s. So, the
things were going on in a way which, you know, maybe haven't been represented in film. But for me, it wasn't a case of me wanting to do that
because I could, it was a case of doing the research to try to make a landscape that this child would move through.
AMANPOUR: And interestingly, for me anyway, you had, ages ago, doing another set of films had found a piece of research that turned you on to
the idea of this boy. You found in the Imperial War Museum a picture of a young black boy with a suitcase being evacuated.
MCQUEEN: Yes. I was doing research for a series of films I did called "Small Acts." And in my research, I found this photograph of this young --
well, this small black child, this boy who had an oversized coat, a large suitcase, and a cap standing at a railway station. He was being evacuated.
And from that, that was my end.
Because, what happened -- the seal of this idea happened when I was in -- I was -- sounds a very weird thing to say, but I was the war artist.
AMANPOUR: Yes, I know, you went to war. You went to the Iraq war.
MCQUEEN: Yes, I went to Iraq.
AMANPOUR: I was covering it when you were there.
MCQUEEN: Exactly. So, it's -- I mean, you know, you're a journalist, you know what this is. I mean, as a civilian, I had never obviously been, as
they say, theatre before, would you believe they call it theatre?
AMANPOUR: Yes, they do.
MCQUEEN: So, as a civilian going -- being in a war zone was very strange, because how I receive the news of war, how I get my information voice
through you guys, through the media. So, to be there on the ground, it was a different thing completely.
So, therefore, when I was with the troops, the British troops there, it was kind of interesting because I really just have a sense of nationalism in a
kind of strange way because there's people from Glasgow, people from Swansea, people from Southampton, people from Newcastle, Liverpool,
whatever. And all these regional accents talking to me about, for example, how they needed to buy, you know, kit off the Americans because their kit
was terrible. That's true.
I had a sense of camaraderie. But it was -- what was perverse for me, I had a sense of camaraderie through war.
AMANPOUR: War, yes. It is --
MCQUEEN: It's bizarre.
AMANPOUR: Yes. I mean, there's many, many psychological, you know, sociological things we could say, but cause it's a great leveler.
MCQUEEN: Isn't it? But that's what I'm trying to say. So, then you bring that stuff I had there to Blitz. And I knew I wanted to make a movie about
the Blitz and that came. I saw that photograph, I knew that was my end.
AMANPOUR: And I mean, is it too obvious to say that, you know, you've done so much work on black experience, obviously 12 years a slave, where does
this fit in that, you know, period of time, in that arc of your work?
MCQUEEN: I don't know. I mean, I just wanted to make -- this was about me making a story about the Blitz. And yes, this photograph was my in. And
then through that in, you found this world, which maybe hadn't been depicted before. I don't know why, but it's interesting, isn't it? It was -
- for me, it was gold dust. Oh, my God, this and this, the Cafe Paris and this and this and, you know, and the underground and how people had to
fight to get into the underground. It was not a given that people --
AMANPOUR: You know, I didn't know that. I thought the underground was open to everybody, but it wasn't.
MCQUEEN: No.
AMANPOUR: And you show that very clearly.
MCQUEEN: What happened was that --
AMANPOUR: Just so that everybody knows, the underground train stations, which became famous shelters during the Blitz.
MCQUEEN: Yes. What happened apparently was Churchill had said he didn't want people to cower. So, they didn't want people to go in the underground.
So, therefore --
AMANPOUR: Well, he wanted just them to show --
MCQUEEN: I have no idea.
AMANPOUR: That's weird.
MCQUEEN: That he didn't want people to cower. So, they didn't want people to go in the underground. That was blocked. People knew about hiding in the
underground because of the Spanish Civil War, because there were people from the eastern who actually fought in the Spanish Civil War, who knew
about hiding in the underground.
So, that's when people sort of --
AMANPOUR: In Madrid?
MCQUEEN: Yes. Kind of forced their way into the underground. And yes, people weren't allowed to go into it. We, the people as such, you know, the
communities of East End forced their way in. And again, it was about them having the power to do so. Similar to in the movie when you have these --
in the factories where they're building bombs, these women, which was actually the most proudest day of my life, was shooting 400 women in this
factory, assembling bombs.
And, you know, once they had this situation of having a -- of a wage and a community and working, they never was going to go back to domestic chores.
They had to have the independence. So, the revolution -- a lot of revolutions started during that period of time.
AMANPOUR: What do you want the impact of this particular film to be? What do you hope it is?
MCQUEEN: I think, you know, it's corny to say, but it's about love. And I -- it's the only -- and it's -- yes, I'll just say it, you know, it sounds
a bit weird, but no, it's not weird at all. I'm very proud to say that because it's the only thing worth dying for, only thing worth living for.
That's it. There's no -- all this nonsense which goes on in the world, that kind of stuff, it's just -- and it comes down to love.
And I had to think of that song of course, "Imagine," the John Lennon. It sounds corny again. Why am I saying things --
AMANPOUR: Why are you being so corny today, Steve?
MCQUEEN: No. Because --
AMANPOUR: I'm not used to a corny Steve McQueen.
[13:35:00]
MCQUEEN: I'm not sort of -- you know what it is? It's sometimes you are embarrassed because of things like that. But I'm not embarrassed anymore. I
think I'm -- it's -- you know, (INAUDIBLE) "Imagine" --
AMANPOUR: It's a great song.
MCQUEEN: My God, you think --
AMANPOUR: Some of the great peace sounds of the world.
MCQUEEN: And again, you know, it's "Mercy Mercy Me" by Marvin Gaye. And again, I talk about songs because in the film, our film song and music is
so important because that's how people corral, you know, they how people sort of love themselves.
AMANPOUR: And how they get together and how they have a little joy as well.
MCQUEEN: Precisely, precisely.
AMANPOUR: Well --
MCQUEEN: And listen, whatever we could add to this mad world, we could get something from. But "Blitz" is somehow about an idea where we reset our
focus through a child's eyes and remember what this is about. And there you have it.
AMANPOUR: It's marvelous. Steve McQueen, thank so much indeed.
MCQUEEN: My pleasure. Thank you so much.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: And "Blitz" is in select theaters from the 1st of November. Begins streaming on Apple TV Plus November 22nd.
With less than a month to go until the U.S. election, the race is in the final furlong. And as the polls get tighter in critical swing states, so
does the pressure to keep campaigning. The Atlantic has officially now endorsed Vice President Harris.
In his latest piece for the magazine, Tom Nichols tells readers and now shares with Hari Sreenivasan why he believes re-electing Donald Trump would
be founding father George Washington's worst nightmare.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HARI SREENIVASAN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Christiane, thanks. Tom Nichols, thanks so much for joining us.
Your most recent column, the cover story for The Atlantic, is titled "Washington's Nightmare: Donald Trump is the Tyrant the First President
Feared." Why this article? Why now? Why is it important to take us back in history?
TOM NICHOLS, STAFF WRITER, THE ATLANTIC: Well, the answer to why now is because we're in a hotly contested, essentially tied election where Donald
Trump is trying to return to office with a very clear agenda to become an autocrat, to subvert the constitution, to undermine American freedoms, to
stain the presidency even worse than he did the first time around.
And I think -- we thought it was important when we were putting this piece together to remind people that all presidents, even the worst presidents
before Trump, still had this kind of benchmark of George Washington, a man of integrity, not a saint, a man with a lot of personal flaws, but
nonetheless, someone who set the standard for presidential behavior.
And even when they violated, you know, that kind of behavior, I think other presidents at least tried to pay lip service to it or understood that they
were walking in Washington's footsteps. Trump seems both unaware of that and really doesn't care about anything related to the office other than how
much power and security it can bring to him.
And so, I thought it was time to say that and to remind people that we don't have to be this way. We do have a better heritage and a better
history to draw on.
SREENIVASAN: There are so many people that like to sort of point back to the founding fathers, you know, originalists, constitutionalists that say,
well, this is the template that these individuals had set out for us. And what your article really shows is really the path in a way that Washington
forged and the benchmark that he set for presidential behavior overall.
NICHOLS: Right. You know, I think you get hung up sometimes on the idea that the founders didn't believe that anything should ever change, you
know, that because it was done, things were done a certain way or certain laws were passed that nothing could ever change.
Washington, for one, believed that the American people had every right to change their constitution as long as they did it peacefully and through
democratic means. But what Washington really reminds us is that he felt that the presidency should be occupied by a person of decency and virtue
and patriotism, someone who was able to put the country ahead of himself. And Washington did that.
Washington, interestingly enough, was always trying to leave the presidency, even though he was a man of great ambition, he was always
deeply concerned that he would fail, that he would somehow not be able to live up to what the country needed from him. And I think that, again,
that's a useful reminder because those are eternal things. Those are not particular amendments to the constitution or particular laws or particular
doctrines from the 18th or 19th century. The basic -- a basic sense that the president should be a person of integrity, decency, empathy, rectitude,
civic virtue. Somebody cares about the country.
SREENIVASAN: You know, you said that the three of Washington's most important qualities, when you kind of break the article down in that way,
his refusal to use great power for his own ends, his extraordinary self- command, and most of all, his understanding that national leaders in a democracy are only temporary stewards of a cause far greater than
themselves.
[13:40:00]
You kind of juxtapose throughout the article each of these characteristics by diving into the history of Washington, but also comparing it and
contrasting it to the behavior of the former president.
NICHOLS: Well, that last one is really important, Hari, that notion of being a guardian or a steward of institutions and of democracy. That's what
allowed Washington to walk away from power multiple times, even when it was basically offered to him on a platter.
In 1783, the army wanted him to lead them to Philadelphia to overthrow Congress, because they were fed up with not getting paid. And just to show
you how far back this idea goes, they were convinced that democracy doesn't work, and Washington crushed that. He absolutely refused to do it and
shamed them.
When it came time for him to leave the army, he did the unthinkable. He went and handed in his military commission and said, I want to go back to
being a civilian, when they would have left him in uniform forever.
And of course, he didn't want to serve two terms. They talked him into it. Jefferson and Hamilton talked him into it, especially, but when it came
time for him to leave, he would not stay -- he could have stayed until he died, and he basically said, I'm going home.
Trump, by contrast, thinks of all these things as things that belong to him. He thinks of all these institutions, the army, the White House, the
presidency, everything in it, all the boxes of his documents, the furniture, the rug, you name it, he thinks that this is just another
corporate acquisition for him and that these are his toys that he can own and use at will. And it couldn't be more different from Washington's notion
that these are important institutions that will outlive him and that belong to the people of the United States of America.
SREENIVASAN: One of the things in the article that leapt out at me was something that John Kelly said at an event in Mount Vernon about George
Washington. And he said that one of the most important things that we should remember about George Washington is that he went home. You go on to
write, people who are mad for power are a mortal threat to democracy. They may hold different titles, but at the heart, they are tyrants. Explain.
NICHOLS: The whole point of a democracy is that you have to be willing to share and exercise power in the name of your fellow citizens and to
relinquish that power when the constitution and the law and elections require you to do that.
The notion that power is yours to keep forever is fundamentally an undemocratic notion. These institutions don't belong to you. The offices
don't belong to you. You are there as a servant of the people. That's why we call it public service. You're there as a servant of the people in the
United States. And Kelly pointed out, not only that Washington went home, but he did it twice. As I said earlier, you know, he gave up his military
commission.
Especially in the 18th century, people just didn't do that. You didn't just say, OK, I'm tired of being a general here. I'm going to go back to my
farm. And that's really essential to the democratic spirit. This notion that you trust your fellow citizens so that when you're done doing your
time serving your country, you hand that office, you hand that power, you hand those institutions to other people who will then exercise them, and
hopefully, with the same virtue and diligence that you did.
SREENIVASAN: Tom, I sometimes wonder whether the conversation that we're having about kind of almost political philosophy and idea and, you know,
sort of principle is somewhere flying at a different altitude than where people are about the decisions that they make.
I mean, what explains if we had some shared civic understanding of what this democracy was, what explains the fealty to Donald Trump over these
other ideals?
NICHOLS: You know, it's a sad thing, Hari, because we used to have this shared understanding, and it wasn't a matter of education and it wasn't a
matter of, you know, being well read or having college degrees. We all understood the basics of people, the basic history that was given to us by
people like George Washington, James Madison, Abraham Lincoln, and others.
That's still out there and it's still being taught. But when people are resentful, when they become drawn inward and they're constantly convinced,
not just by Donald Trump, but by this stream of right-wing media pounding messages of grievances, you become kind of narcissistic and you can only
look inward. And all of these other concepts, service, duty, honor, honesty, just get crowded out as noise. And all you can hear is yourself
and your own anger.
And a lot of the Trump voters, I think -- and you know, this, I think, it's something that's become clearer over a year or two. Eight years ago, we had
a lot of theories about why this happened, but most of them haven't panned out. This really does come down to grievance and resentment being ginned up
among a particular group of people who are reasonably well off, who live reasonably comfortable lives, but don't like the fact that the country is
changing, that demographically and socially, the country has changed in ways they just don't happen to like.
[13:45:00]
And so, they've crowded all of this out. They don't want to hear it. They know, I guess I would argue, as I've been saying for years, I think
somewhere deep down they know they're wrong, which makes them even more resistant to any discussion because it's very uncomfortable for them.
But we -- as I keep saying, I wrote this because we don't have to live this way. We don't have to be this way. The heritage of Washington and the
founders and Lincoln and Roosevelt and others, it's all available to us. We don't need any specialized training to embrace it. It's there and it's
always been there for us.
SREENIVASAN: So, Tom, in the same vein, how do you explain the appeal and embrace of Donald Trump and Elon Musk? You wrote a separate piece earlier
this week that profiled their relationship. You called them quote, "plutocrats masquerading as ordinary Americans."
NICHOLS: Part of this resentment and part of this anger and this sort of itching resentment about social change is that a lot of these voters see
other people living relatively good lives, and that enrages them. They don't understand it. They think they shouldn't be living good lives. They
want them punished.
There was a Trump voter years ago who got thrown out of work because of one of Trump's government shutdown threats. And she said, this isn't what I
voted for. He's not hurting the people he's supposed to be hurting. And that is very much -- once you've -- once you're voting to hurt people then
you are part of this kind of resentful tribe.
And you don't really care about your interests. You don't really care about policy. You want to -- you want people who are rich enough and powerful
enough, people like Trump and Musk and Vance, who is a multimillionaire himself, you want to see people go out there and have the ability to hurt
people that you think shouldn't be living as well as they are, that to hurt people who seem to not be paying attention to you and to make them pay
attention to you. And that's, I think why they're attracted to these plutocratic fake populists, because these guys have the money and the reach
to be able to make other people miserable if they really choose to.
SREENIVASAN: So, what was it about, say, for example, George Washington, who was incredibly popular but who wasn't into populism or the wisdom of
the crowds?
NICHOLS: You know, it's a wonderful example of -- to show that you can be one of the most popular people in the country. Washington ran unopposed. I
mean, two unanimous victories in the Electoral College, could have had a third if he really wanted it. And yet, was deeply distrustful of popular
emotion and made no bones about that.
And I think one of the things that distinguished Washington and the early founders, the early presidents up until you get to maybe the age of Andrew
Jackson, who becomes the first, you know, real populist kind of president was that they all said, look, we are not here to simply amplify the
emotions of ordinary people. We're here as -- to serve the public. We hear you, but that doesn't mean we simply do whatever you want done. That's why
the founders built in all these checks and balances. They put a Senate in to slow down legislation. They had a president who had a veto. They
understood this role that you simply could not rule a country by direct democracy.
This isn't like Athens where everybody crowds into the public square and yells loudly, and then all of the loudest cheers create policy. That's
exactly what the founders didn't want, but that's exactly what people like Trump promise. He goes to rallies and he says, how about if I do this? And
the crowd cheers and he says, see, I'm a genius. It's a great idea. Something Washington would never have done.
And to their credit, most of the early founders would never have even considered doing that. And in fact, they worried about it. They've worried
about a demagogue who would try to lead the country by doing that kind of an appeal to an amount to emotion and to rage and to anger. And they put
institutions in place to try to prevent that from happening.
SREENIVASAN: You know, you have taught for 25 years at the U.S. Naval War College. You've taught about Washington. But for this story, you kind of
went back and researched his life. You point out in the article, as many people know, that he wasn't without flaws, that he was a slaveholder, you
know.
[13:50:00]
But I also wonder, even kind of knowing that, why have we elevated George Washington to this almost mythical status? I mean, when you look at the
monuments in Washington alone, you have these beautiful ornate places for Lincoln and Jefferson, and you literally have this Egyptian obelisk, that
is the Washington Monument, right? And why is that?
NICHOLS: Well, I think part of it is that Washington himself was something of a sphinxlike character. It hurt him to talk. We joke about the false
teeth. He was always a man who was very careful with his words. But in later life, it actually did hurt him to speak. And so, he just listened,
was very deliberative, kept his own counsel, but on top of that, I think Americans needed a unifying myth. A unifying almost God-like figure around
whom they could rally.
And Washington was a great choice. He had won the war. He had presided over the Constitutional Convention. He was a man of unimpeachable integrity. He
was respected by everyone across the board among the early revolutionaries. And I think, you know, as a young nation, we wanted to have a founding
hero.
And, you know, your point about the obelisk is so well taken because the few statues of Washington that were done around that time were really bad.
I mean, they were modeled on Greek gods. The rotunda of the Capitol has Washington, to this day, you can see it, he's sitting in heaven like a
deity. And that's not who he was. And I think he wouldn't have liked that very much now that I think I know him better.
But I think that's part of founding, you know, a new nation that, you know, we need our pantheon of heroes and Washington was the first and greatest
among them.
SREENIVASAN: You know, the idea that this election is more crucial, more pivotal than previous ones is something that you hear a lot from the left,
but you don't necessarily hear that in the same way from the right. I mean, what is your concern for your party, the Republican Party, for America at
large depending on the outcomes?
NICHOLS: Well, my former party. I left several years ago because of Donald Trump and because of the general drift of the Republican Party, which has
become just a cult of personality and a vehicle for power.
I think the reason this election that people like me are still using terms like existential, you know, Donald Trump's first term could have been much
more terrifying than it was. There were still some people who bottlenecked and obstructed some of the worst things that Donald Trump wanted to do.
They won't be there this time.
More to the point, you could argue that in 2016, this was a one off. That it was a weird election between two deeply unpopular people, Trump and
Hillary Clinton. And that Trump cobbled together this kind of freakish outcome in the Electoral College. If he wins in 2024, I'm sorry to say,
we're going to have to confront the reality that this is who we are. That this is who a large number of Americans really are, that this is what they
want, and they think it's desirable, and they think it's something that they're enjoying. And that's not a functional, healthy democracy.
Then I think we are no longer the greatest democracy in the world. We're no longer the democracy we once thought we were that we are, you know, a
country that's in democratic decline. Because once -- you know, once you can argue as a mistake or a one off, twice he tried and was defeated. If he
comes in on the third try, then I -- and then I think you have to just accept that things have changed in this country and that we are not the
country we once were.
SREENIVASAN: Staff writer for The Atlantic, Tom Nichols, thanks so much.
NICHOLS: Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
AMANPOUR: And of course, the eyes of the world are on the U.S. election as well. And finally, tonight, the end of an era for tennis grandmaster Rafael
Nadal. Today, the 22 Grand Slam champion posted this video on X announcing his retirement, saying thank you in 12 languages to his supporters all
across the globe.
The Spaniard's career has been nothing short of extraordinary, from a record 14 French Open titles, four U.S. Opens, two Australian and Wimbledon
trophies, the list just goes on. And all of this despite tackling several injuries.
In 2022, after his record Roland Garros win Paris, I asked him whether retirement had ever crossed his mind. Here's what he told me.
[13:55:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RAFAEL NADAL, 22-TIME GRAND SLAM CHAMPION: Going through all these probably challenges, I always hold the passion for keep going, you know,
and I always hold the love for the game, you know. And I always wanted to keep going.
It's all about having the chance to be happy playing tennis or not. And if the pain is impossible to manage, then you can't be happy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AMANPOUR: He has apparently now figured that it's become impossible, but Nadal says he's looking forward to representing Spain one last time at the
Davis Cup next month, a career that's come full circle because the 2004 final was, quote, "one of his first joys," as he says.
That's 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, all-over social media. Thank you for watching. Goodbye from London.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:00:00]
END
