The Prof G Pod with Scott Galloway - Top Geopolitical Risks of 2025 — with Ian Bremmer

Episode Date: January 9, 2025

Ian Bremmer, the president and founder of the Eurasia Group, joins Scott to discuss what he believes are the year’s top geopolitical risks. These risks include the breakdown of the global order, Trump’s return to office, along with escalating tensions between major powers all over the world.  Follow Ian, @ianbremmer. Scott opens with his thoughts on Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy’s advisory warning that alcohol consumption is a leading cause of cancer. Algebra of Happiness: success is a series of small actions, every day. Subscribe to No Mercy / No Malice Buy "The Algebra of Wealth," out now. Follow the podcast across socials @profgpod: Instagram Threads X Reddit Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Want to know what helps keep Wall Street pros ahead? Level 2 market data. And trading platform Mumu gives it to you for free with a qualified deposit. Plus, Mumu offers zero commission stock trading, pro-level tools, and seamless trading from your desk or your phone. Right now, open an account and get up to 15 free stocks. Plus, earn 8.1% APY on uninvested cash. Head to moomoo.com and take charge of your trading.

Terms and conditions apply. Please visit www.moomoo.com for all disclosures. You can find the link at the bottom of the homepage. Support for the show comes from NerdWallet. When it comes to finding the best financial products, have you ever wished someone would do the heavy lifting for you? Take all that research off your plate. Well, with NerdWallet's 2025 Best of Award, that wish has come true.

The nerds at NerdWallet are on it. They have already reviewed more than 1,100 financial products like credit cards, savings accounts and more in order to highlight and bring you the best of the best. Check out the 2025 Best of Awards today at nerdwallet.com slash awards. Episode 331. 331 is the area code for the West Suburbs of Chicago. In 1931, the Empire State Building opened in New York City. It took a year to build the Empire State Building.

It took eight years to build an extension for the seven line subway. And last night it took one man about 17 minutes to pee. Go, go, go! Welcome to the 331st episode of the Prop G pod. The dog is back. It's 2025. Okay. Onto today's episode. We're going to speak with Ian Bremmer, the president and founder of Eurasia Group, the world's leading political research and consulting firm. Ian is to prop G what Alec Baldwin is to SNL. Alec Baldwin has appeared on SNL 52 times and 17 times as a host.

By the way, I am the COVID Alec Baldwin of the Bill Maher show. During COVID, I was on Bill Maher four times until I've been on a total of five times. I was on most recently, but technically, I guess it wasn't COVID, but I was sort of there. COVID ho, that's right. Anyways, in today's episode, we speak with Ian

about the top risks for 2025. These risks include a breakdown of the global order, Trump's return to office, along with escalating tensions between major powers all over the world. What's happening? What's going on? What's the 411 in 2025? U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy issued an advisory warning that alcohol consumption is a leading cause of cancer. The Surgeon General is calling for the U.S. to add cancer warning labels to alcoholic drinks, similar to the ones on cigarettes. He said that alcohol is responsible for about 100,000 cases and 20,000 deaths annually in

the US and ranks as the third leading preventable cause of cancer in the US following tobacco and obesity. I bet obesity is number one now. This is greater than the 13,000 alcohol associated traffic crash fatalities that occur each year. According to Surgeon General Murtty, even in small amounts, alcohol can increase the risk of developing breast, colon, liver, and other cancers. Oh my gosh, so first off,

Surgeon General Murty is the most consequential Surgeon General in history. And for all of the, I don't know, consensual hallucination and narcissism that surrounded the Biden campaign, believing that he was the right guy to run again, you have to hand it, I believe, to the Biden administration for appointing talented people, not people who think that the polio vaccine is dangerous, or that they write children's books, saying talking about retribution against political enemies,

and that they're going to head the FBI. I mean, Jesus Christ, if Dancing with the Stars invited lower IQ, more dangerous people on the show, that could be the current Trump administration appointees. What were we thinking? Literally, no, what are they thinking? Anyway, enough of that. I always promised myself I'm gonna be less political on the shows.

Broken promises to myself. I also thought, I also said, I'm gonna be kinder to myself and I'm gonna love myself more and I'm gonna allow myself to be happy. Well, that shit hasn't panned out either. Although I'm doing the straw breathing method. Pshh, pshh, pshh, pshh.

Yeah, that shit doesn't work. My method for anxiety is what I call perone and Xanax or as I like to call it, panics. By the way, I had a breathing coach last night. I went to this place and this guy taught me how to breathe. I'm sitting there thinking, this is getting me fucking anxious and angry. I used to know how to breathe on my own.

I used to not have to think about it. Now it's another thing I gotta think about. Seriously, breathing class made me angry, intense. Enough of this shit. I think this self-care and the self-love is more self-hate from rich people looking for reasons, I don't know, to punish themselves under the delusion or the illusion they're gonna live to be 100.

No, you're not Tom Cruise. He is gonna live to be 100 and he's gonna be sexy as hell, but not you. You're gonna look like just an old person and then we're gonna die. Anyways, back to dying early, alcohol. This is fascinating and it's causing huge ripples on a number of levels. Some data, 70% of Americans consume alcohol, but a recent survey found that only 45% of

people believe alcohol can cause cancer. The US is ranked 35th in the world in alcohol consumption per capita and fourth in the world in age standardized cancer rates. According to Gallup, just 58% of Americans were drinkers in 2024. That's a 28 year low. Studies show Gen Z drinks approximately 20% less alcohol than millennials. In other words, this is really fucking ugly. This is like cable TV, right? Look at the average age of an MSNBC viewer. They are, let me get this, they're dead. And as you go lower and lower and lower, younger and younger, younger, people don't

even own TVs, much less watch cable television. And as you go lower and lower and lower, younger and younger, younger, people don't even own TVs, much less watch cable television. And it's the same with alcohol. The writing is on the wall here, folks. Young people are not drinking alcohol. You can see evidence of this shift on dating apps. Oh, I love this. 72% or almost three quarters of Tinder members

said they don't drink or only drink occasionally on their profiles. And 75% of global hinge singles say getting drinks is no longer their preferred first aid activity. Wow, that's wild. One of my most popular TikToks is I think young people should drink more. I don't see drunkenness. I see togetherness.

My advice to young people is to go out and drink more and make a series of bad decisions in my payoff. I think that we need more togetherness, more people, more sex, more random encounters, and absolutely people need to be in the company of strangers more and more. And I think young men are sequestering. We're turning into a different species of asexual, socially isolated, lonely people who become shitty citizens. And when women don't have a romantic relationship,

they reinvest in work and their friends. When men don't have a relationship, they tend to just go down a rabbit hole. Noah, what do I mean by that? If you have a problem with alcohol consumption and you need to be cognizant of any substance intake, yeah, be thoughtful and ask your friends and don't use it as a crutch.

But for the most part, I think the majority of young people can process alcohol, can handle it. And I believe, and I've said this, that my kind of tongue in cheek advice to young people is that they should go out more, get out of the house more, drink more, and make a series of bad decisions that might pay off. Some of my, basically,

the majority of my really strong relationships, my friendships and my romantic relationships have involved alcohol. And while doctors Atia and Huberman correctly, you could argue, see drunkenness among young people, I see togetherness. I think a bigger threat to younger people is not alcohol. It's sequestering from each other. Look at what's happening. Molson Coors is down 10% their stock price. AB InBev is down 25%. They've lost a quarter of their value. By the way, AB InBev is one of the best-run companies

in the drinks industry. These people are smart. Hunnigan is down 29%. This is in the face of 23% up in the markets, right? London Spirits company Diageo is down 12%. US whiskey maker, Brown Forman is down 34%. They make Jack Daniels, I used to drink Jack and Coke and then I figured out that all that sugar

and all that alcohol is probably not very good for me. God, just saying that, I'm salivating. I love Jack and Coke. And then I got fancy and I started ordering makers and Coke. Anyways, enough of my alcoholism. What are they doing about this? They're leaning into the growing trend of non-alcoholic beverages.

These are smart people. Global sales of non-alcoholic drinks hit nearly 20 billion in 2023, doubling in size over the last five years. The non-alcoholic market grew about 20% last year compared to just 8% for alcoholic drinks. Big brands, including Diageo and LVMH, are getting into the alcohol-free market. Diageo made a non-alcoholic Captain Morgan,

Jesus, that sounds awful, and bought Richelieu while LVMH has taken a minority stake in French Bloom, a non-alcoholic sparkling wine. Actually, that's probably a pretty decent idea for a startup, is some sort of cool, well-branded non-alcoholic drink that feels aspirational or has some sort of whatever NAD or something that makes you younger, faster, smarter. Non-alcoholic beer leads feels aspirational or has some sort of whatever NAD or something that makes you younger, faster, smarter.

Non-alcoholic beer leads the market though with brands including Heineken. It's paying off according to the economists, non-alcoholic drinks are more profitable than alcoholic drinks. That's because they're priced nearly the same as regular drinks, but taxed at a much lower rate. I love the thought that bars are really being sympathetic to people who are not drinking

by offering them $14 mocktails. Anyways, let me just finish where I began here, and that is you need to constantly take an audit of what substances or what behaviors you're engaging in that are damaging the other parts of your life. That's kind of the definition of addiction. You continue to do something despite the fact that it's bad for the other parts of your life. But I do believe that young people need to get out and engage in some bad decisions. We'll be right back for our conversation with Ian Bremmer. Nerds. Support for the show comes from NerdWallet. Listener, a new year is finally here. And if

you're anything like me, you've got a lot on your plate, new habits to build, travel plans to make, podcasts to host. Good thing our sponsor, NerdWallet, is here to take one of those things off your plate, finding the best financial products, introducing NerdWallet's best of awards list, your shortcut to the best credit card, savings accounts, and more. The nerds at NerdWallet have done the work for you, researching and reviewing over 1,100 financial products to bring you only the best of the best. Looking for a balanced transfer credit card with a 0% APR? They've got a winner for that. How about a bank account with a top rate to hit your savings goals?

They've got a winner for that too. That way you can know you're getting the best products for you without doing all the research yourself. So let NerdWallet do the heavy lifting for your financial future this year and head over to their 2025 Best Of Awards at nerdwallet.com slash awards to find the best financial products today. Want to know what helps keep Wall Street pros ahead?

Level two market data. Real-time NYSE and NASDAQ data usually costs hundreds. But trading platform MooMoo gives you access for free with a qualified deposit. MooMoo also offers zero-commission stock trading, plus pro-level tools that let you trade seamlessly from your desk or on your phone. The best bit?

Open an account now and you can get up to 15 free stocks. Plus, they're offering 8.1% APY on uninvested cash. Yep, 8.1% APY. So head to MooMoo.com and take charge of your trading. Terms and conditions apply. Please visit www.mooMoo.com for all disclosures. You can find the link at the bottom of the homepage. Trust isn't just earned. It's demanded. Whether you're a startup founder navigating your first audit or a seasoned security professional scaling your GRC program, proving your commitment to security has never been more critical or more complex. That's where Vanta comes in.

Businesses use Vanta to establish trust by automating compliance needs across 35 frameworks, like SOC 2 and ISO 27001. They also centralize security workflows, complete questionnaires up to five times faster, and proactively manage vendor risk. Join over 9,000 global companies like Atlassian, Quora, and Factory, who use Vanta to manage

risk and prove security in real time. For a limited time, our audience gets $1,000 off Vanta at vanta.com slash vox. That's v-a-n-t-a dot com slash vox. Welcome back. Here's our conversation with Ian Bremmer, the president and founder of Eurasia Group, the world's leading political risk research and consulting firm. Ian, where does this podcast find you? I'm in New York in our new headquarters. Okay, let's bust right into it. Eurasia Group's top risk report for 2025 is out. In the report, you say we are heading back to the law of the jungle.

That's dramatic. Where the strongest do what they can, while the weakest are condemned to suffer what they must. What did you mean by that? For the last 35 years, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the fall of the wall, we'd talked at least nominally about the idea that we're living in an increasingly globalized world, that the United States is a democracy that supports rule of law around the world, supports other democracies, collective security, all of those things. And yet the reality is that order is breaking down. It's breaking down for a lot of reasons. It's breaking down because the Russians are not a part of the West.

They're in decline structurally. They're really angry about it. They blame the US and they've now alliances up with North Korea and Iran, and they're pretty friendly with China too. So that's an incredibly dangerous place for the world to be. It's not something we had to deal with 10 or 20 years ago. Now we do.

We've got China, second most powerful country in the world, but they're not aligning with the United States. They're actually becoming in many ways a more consolidated dictatorship under Xi Jinping. And they're putting more pressure on the private sector. They're supporting more pressure on the private sector, they're supporting more privately owned national champions and state capitalist, state owned enterprises, and so that's causing

much more conflict in the most important geopolitical relationship in the world. And then, most importantly, the US in particular has just fundamentally rejected the idea that we're going to be global leaders supporting rule of law and multilateral institutions. It's America first, baby. It's our way or the highway. And we're going to tell other countries that you're going to work with us and do the things

we want our way, or there's going to be hell to pay. And so yeah, that sounds a lot like a reversion to the law of the jungle, that the powerful and strongest countries and people get to do what they want. I think Trump is much more of a winner than he is a leader. I think that Elon is much more of a winner than he is a leader. What do you mean by that? Well, leaders are people that in their organizations, they bring people together. I think that Elon is much more of a winner than he is a leader. What do you mean by that? Well, leaders are people that in their organizations, they bring people together.

So if you're the leader of the United States, all American citizens look and they say, this is my leader, your leader corporation, all of the all the people in that corporation say, this is my leader. If you're a winner, right, you divide your winner. There are other winners and then there are losers, right? And I really think that that is a fundamental challenge that American democracy has, and American capitalism has, that we've moved away from being a country of leaders that are trying to make a difference for their fellow man and woman and fellow citizens in the world. And instead we're winning individually, but we're very tribal, we're very divided,

including inside our own country and with our allies. And that makes the world a much more dangerous place. And if you're a loser, you got to suck it up. You got to accept the rules that the winners are making, right? Because they won. So, I mean, you know, if you're Mark Zuckerberg, you know, you better, you got to change your attitude, my friend, because it's not about how successful you've been.

It's about are you on board with the winners, right? I mean, and that's true for everybody. If you're the French, the Germans, the Brits, you know, you better get on board. If you're the Canadians, right? I mean, Tr that's true for everybody. If you're the French, the Germans, the Brits, you know, you better get on board. If you're the Canadians, right? I mean, Trudeau just resigned. Did he resign a little faster because he screwed up with Trump? Yeah, I think so.

I think Trump pushed him. I mean, he was shot in the face by, by Chris Jafreeland, his deputy prime minister, but he was still on life support until Trump, uh, shivd him. Uh, and, uh, and, and now he's out, you know? So I think there's a lot of that happening in the world today geopolitically as well as in your world Scott so just a couple of thesis I want you to respond to or get your reaction in terms of the law of the jungle my sense is we're the king of the jungle we being the US and

that is I look at our enemies slash adversaries So let's start with Iran, Russia and North Korea. And so- You can throw China in too if you want to. Well, I think of China, I'll come back to that, but I think China is what I call an adversary or a competitor, but not our enemy. I completely agree. It's a different category, but it's interesting

because they're weaker now than they were a couple of years ago. 100%. So this is the thesis and you respond to it. In terms of our enemies, we're kicking their ass. And that is Iran's air defenses have been penetrated by Israel. Their proxies, the Houthis, Hamas, and Hezbollah

have had their hands cut off. And Assad's gone. And Assad's gone. Basically, kind of the ally of Russia has had to flee to Russia because of a collapse there. Russia is bogged down in a war they were not expecting to go this long with these types of results. And then let's move to, as you said,

our competitor slash adversary, not our enemy, their economy has just been underwhelming the last 10 years, whereas ours has accelerated. I mean, it's better to be lucky than good. I see Trump as inheriting the strongest hand he could have in America on almost every dimension, other than the fact we hate each other. And a lot of our prosperity is not being distributed equally

on a balanced scorecard, on a relative scorecard, we are kicking everyone's ass. Your thoughts? First, let me add to your list, because you mentioned enemies and adversary slash competitor. And I do think that's the right way to put it. I think China is not the axis of evil or a pariah state the way that the North Koreans, Russians, and Iranians are. Those are chaos actors that want to destroy the international system. that want to destroy the international

system. They want to defeat the Americans. The Chinese actually need a stable global economy to prosper themselves. So even if they would like to defeat the Americans, they know that that doesn't actually work with their system. But in addition to that, America's allies are also weaker, right? Technologically much weaker. I mean, you think about where the Americans are in terms of entrepreneurship and semiconductors and AI and all these new companies and the markets and the strength of the dollar. Where are the Europeans? Where are the Japanese? Where are the South Koreans? Where are the Canadians? The answer is nowhere land. And their governments are so weak. The US has just elected Trump. And unlike last time around, right, with Biden winning and January 6, I mean,

Trump has a mandate. And unlike 2017, Trump has coattails, right? I mean, the Republicans see that they need him, not the other way around. So he's appointed a whole bunch of loyalists. You don't have any Rex Tillerson's in this group. No Jim Mattis in this group. No Nikki Haley in this group. So no Mike Pence in this group, right? So he's consolidated. He's strong. He's willing to use American power. And America's allies are incredibly weak. Their governments are falling apart. South Korea, Germany, France, Canada, all of these countries. So everywhere you look, the United States is stronger.

Now, I also think at home, the US is not in decline. Not at all. The people still want to come to America. The American economy is doing very well. American military is doing well. Its technology is doing very well. But of course, you said, except the fact that we hate each other, not just that, not just that, Scott, except the fact that our political system is increasingly not representative. It's increasingly captured by money and special interests. The US system

is increasingly a two tier system. and it's not Democrats versus Republicans. It's access to power versus no access to power, right? And that is uniquely dysfunctional in the context of advanced industrial democracies. So you've got a political system that is not working, that is arguably in crisis. I mean, if Narendra Modi, who is the most popular democratically elected leader of a large country

in the world today, OK, Bukele in El Salvador has him beat, but in a big country, if he were to have a phone call or meetings with heads of state and CEOs and bring in Gautam Adani, you and I would rightly state, this country is an oligarchy. It's a kleptocracy. And yet, that's precisely what's happening with Trump and Elon right now, and it's completely normalized.

So I do think that we can't just say, well, with the exception of the fact that we hate each other and the political system doesn't work. Actually, that's a pretty cool thing about the United States is the fact that the US has a political system that other countries are supposed to admire, are supposed to be more aligned with. We've got values that set the standards for the rest of the world. Rule of law is something that the rest of the world wants to be a part of. Our worldview is supposed to be the dominant collective worldview. That's not true anymore. So we're

very powerful. And in the law of the jungle, we're the big ape. Absolutely. But the law of the jungle is a much more brutal, nasty and dangerous place than a world that has laws and accountability and responsibility and institutions and architecture that the United States is leading with its allies and trying to get other countries to increasingly align with it.

It's a radically different place. You bring up an interesting thought and that is, you know, we're now 50% of the world's market capitalization, our stocks. There's one company in the U S that is more valuable than every stock market with the exception of Japan. But if there is a global crisis that emerges as strong as we are, we just can't go it alone. We need allies. And I don't care if it's world war two or, you know,

repelling Saddam out of Kuwait, whatever it might be, you know, even addressing COVID. There needs to be global cooperation. There needs to be a certain level of goodwill. There needs to be alliances. And I think first and foremost, I think of how successful NATO has been keeping the peace since World War II.

Is it fair to say that those alliances have been dramatically frayed, thereby making it a more dangerous world for America despite its strength? That's an interesting question, Scott. On the one hand, the level of trust of American allies for the United States, that the US would be there when push comes to shove,

has eroded dramatically. So there, I mean, if a collective security is somehow fundamentally based on the notion that you believe in each other, you're accountable for each other, believe in each other, you're accountable for each other, I think it has weakened. On the other hand, the Europeans are spending a lot more on defense now than they were, and the Japanese are spending a lot more on defense now than they were. And Mark Rutte, the new Secretary General of NATO, former Prime Minister of the Netherlands, former prime minister of the Netherlands, is now working with the Europeans to move to 3% GDP spend on defense,

which they're doing outside of the EU mechanisms so that the Hungarians can't veto it, which means they are moving. I think that's going to happen, which means that they're gonna be, in all likelihood, by the end of the Trump administration, the Europeans will be paying about as much percentage of GDP on defense as the Americans do. So that's a stronger NATO. And I mean, when Trump demands that NATO allies spend more on defense, that's not a pro-Putin

message. That's the exact opposite of what Putin wants them to do. So it's kind of interesting, right? I mean, it's the same way that America's not in decline, but its political system is, the alliances, like the soft power, the willingness to engage with each other on the basis of we like you, we trust you,

this matters to us, that has eroded a lot. And yet with America as a much more powerful country that other countries have to align with or else, actually the Americans can drive a lot more. And so you saw this in our risk report. We have red herrings at the end, things that people think are going to happen that we think will not. And one of our herrings was Trump fails.

And you see this a lot in the mainstream media. This guy's a buffoon. He's incompetent. He only cares about himself. So of course, he's going to fail all over the place. We don't think so. We think that Trump is going to say a whole bunch of stuff, and people are going to get on board.

They're going to align with him. I mean, if you think that Facebook and Apple are kissing his ass in Mar-a-Lago, that's nothing compared to how foreign governments who are aligned with the United States and know they can't afford to do anything else, the Mexicans, you know, the Europeans, they're gonna want to find a way to ensure they don't have a crisis with this guy.

So he's gonna have a lot of wins in the early stages. It's interesting because to be fair, I think what you're saying is Trump's interesting because to be fair, I think what you're saying is Trump's, I don't know, I wouldn't call it a middle finger, but his rolling his eyes or his lack of fear of saying aggressive things about allies has resulted in an increase in spending,

which should, if you will, we still might be the world's policeman, but other people are now buying their own squad cars, that this has been a direct positive result of Trump's actions or adversarial tone complexion with our allies, do you agree? I do, I do, but also I would say that the gap is big. It's going to take a long time for them to spend at that level to get close to capabilities to really defend themselves. This is not going

to get resolved in four years, even if their level of spending at that point percentage wise is equivalent to the US. And some countries are already there, the Baltics, Poland, some of the Nordics, that kind of thing. But also there's a question of the fact that the Americans have the capacity to be a global policeman, even with support. Trump has no interest in doing that, right? I mean, Trump was the one that cut the deal

with the Taliban that Biden then executed on. Syria, you've got a government that's now in place in Syria that's very unlikely going to be able to stabilize that incredibly complex and volatile territory. You've got over 2,000 US troops stationed in Syria right now. Trump doesn't want to keep those troops there. If Trump pulls them out, it's not like France is going to send those troops. It's not like the UK is. It's much more likely that the Turks are going to be on the ground. They're going to hit the Kurds hard, no longer jailing ISIS on the ground, and the potential for that to become fertile for a new caliphate is real. So, I mean, the absence of the U.S.

as a willing policeman will save American taxpayers. It will put fewer lives at risk, but it will lead to more ungoverned spaces. It will lead to more depredation, more forced migration that will affect other countries to a much greater degree than the US because the US is geographically very well located and between Canada and Mexico and two big bodies of water, but the world will become more dangerous and more unstable. So, there's that.

So, and I don't know if this is a function of living abroad now, but when I come back, or I don't feel as I'm as in touch with America as which is a good and a bad thing. And I'd like to think it's offered some perspective, but I am mildly horrified minus the mildly. And what I see is this full embrace by not only our leaders, but by acceptance by our media and the general public of what is just an obvious, naked, unafraid, unashamed kleptocracy. That if you look at the inaugural campaigns,

I think of all the Big Ten or the magazine Ten, there was like a couple of $200,000 donations to the inaugural campaign or inaugural celebration of Biden. And now every one of them is lined up and put in a million bucks. I mean, this feels like literally an episode of The Sopranos where they walk into the local retailer and say, you know, it'd be a shame if your windows got broken and this place got robbed, we need protection money. And this has now gone full kleptocracy, where Musk increases his wealth by 150 or 200 billion for no other reason as far as I can tell,

that they assume that because he put in a quarter of a billion dollars, that the largest deepest pocketed customer in the world will throw money at him and anybody else who decides pay for play. Have we gone, is it unfair to say we have gone full kleptocratic? Well, the trajectory is very strongly in that direction,

and it was already bad before Trump. I mean, you know, three billion plus spent on our presidential election over two years doesn't need to be that way. You know, the incredible willingness of special interests in the US to capture the regulatory system to write their own policies, that's not a competitive free market. A competitive free market is one where you've got regulators that represent the public interest and companies have to compete against each other.

It's not about who has more access to power and who has the ability to write regulations that support them and get subsidies. It's about who has the best product, who's the most competitive. We're very far from that in the United States right now. We still have a great environment for small enterprises that start up with plucky entrepreneurs

like you and I have experienced and benefited from through our lives. But America's still great at that, but in terms of big corporations and billionaires, now we're talking about a country that is open to the highest bidder. And our allies see that and they're worried about it. They don't like it. And it's not the way their systems run, not the advanced industrial economies anyway. It's closer to the way a

lot of emerging markets run. And we should worry, I think, a lot about that. Absolutely. And that's where the Elon thing really bothers me. Less about freedom of speech and more about, what does it mean? What does he get for his quarter of a billion dollars with Trump? We see how much access he has. We see that he has a position that's

a nongovernmental advisory position in Doge. We see his ability to talk directly with competitor CEOs while he's sitting with the president or heads of state while he's sitting with the president to functionally even veto legislation when he speaks out against it, get people aligned. I mean, that's a pretty unique position. We've not seen anyone like that before. He's certainly the most powerful

individual in the private sector that the US has experienced since the Gilded Age. What does that mean? What does that mean for the United States domestically, its political system? What does that mean for the US with its allies in the global order? I don't think it's a good development. We'll be right back. Support for the show comes from Delta Airlines. In 2025, Delta Airlines turns 100 years old. That's a century of changing the way we fly.

A century of making the world more accessible by transforming global travel. Delta has led the way in shaping solutions that improve the lives of their customers. Looking to the next 100 years, they're thinking boldly and moving quickly to implement impactful innovations that make every journey as unique as you are.

Delta is evolving the in-flight entertainment experience with new partnerships and features unlocked with your SkyMiles membership. Delta Sync Seatback gives you in-flight access to curated entertainment, exclusive offers, and more from brands you love. And coming soon, you'll be able to access even more tools to help you customize your onboard experience and get ready to arrive at your destination. And coming soon, your FlyDelta app will give you access to Delta Concierge, a series of AI capabilities built into the app to give you more control and confidence navigating your travel experience.

Whether you're a frequent flyer or an occasional jet-setter, Delta Concierge will make you feel like a travel pro. Go to deltaunlocks.com to learn more about the future of travel with Delta. If you're serious about investing, you need to know about public.com. That's where you can invest in everything, stocks, options, bonds, and more. And even earn a 6% or higher yield than you can lock in with a bond account. Visit public.com slash podcast to get up to $10,000 when you transfer your old portfolio.

That's public.com slash podcast. Paid for by Public Investing. All investing involves risk of loss, including loss of principal. Brokered services for US listed, registered securities options and bonds in a self-directed account are offered by Public Investing Incorporated.

Members FINRA and SIPC. Complete disclosures available at public.com slash disclosures. complete disclosures available at public.com slash disclosures. Amazon Pharmacy presents Painful Thoughts. The guy in front of me in the pharmacy line is halfway through an incredibly detailed 17 minute story about his gout, a story likely more painful than the gout itself. Next time, save yourself the pain and let Amazon Pharmacy deliver your meds right to your door. Amazon Pharmacy. Health care just got less painful. So you touched on Syria and risk number nine, you called ungoverned spaces.

Do you think, and you did begin to outline this, do you think what's happened in Syria is a net positive or negative for the West? I think the fact that Assad has gone as a net positive for the West, because Assad was an utterly brutal dictator who allowed for more people around the world to believe that they could act with impunity in their own backyards, get away with it. He was an ally to not just Russia, but Iran.

He facilitated the illegal transfer of weapons from Iran into Lebanon, strengthening Hezbollah, which is seen by the US as a terrorist organization, as a principal adversary of Israel. He oversaw the principal production of Captagon, an incredibly addictive, enormously debilitating illegal drug that was being exported all over the region and Europe and some to the United States. I am delighted that he's gone and I don't shed any tears about him getting poisoned in Moscow within a couple of weeks of the Russians accepting him, in quotes. What has replaced him is at best, at best uncertain. I mean, this new government came out of ISIS-connected folks, and they are certainly showing that they want to be more inclusive, that they've turned over a new leaf. But does that really mean that they're going to a new leaf. But, you know, does that really mean

that they're gonna be either capable or willing to run a more stable, more inclusive government that won't either collapse or won't launch a war against large numbers of its own citizens? We'll have to wait and see. But no, it's clearly a positive, a net positive for the West and for everyone that Assad is gone.

So one of the few places I think we have a bit of a differing viewpoint is on Israel and the conflict there. And I'll put forward another thesis that Israel's bold and courageous actions taking out more terrorists in six weeks than we took out in 25 years on our most wanted list, cutting off the hands of the proxies of Iran, incredibly bold, the most precise anti-terrorist action or operation in history with the pages and Hezbollah

that Israel has demonstrated not only tremendous power, expertise, and strategy here, but they, in my view, their actions are going to make the Middle East a safer, more stable, more pro-West place because of their actions. Your thoughts? Well, first of all, the only risk that shows up in our report on the Middle East, one is that oil prices are likely to be low, which means less money for the Gulf states, both for themselves as well as to help countries in the region that need and have benefited from their aid, like Jordan, for example, Egypt, for example, Tunisia, for example. And secondly, Iran, which is a significant risk in part because they are,

their regime is on life support, they've lost their empire and the Americans and the Israelis might well decide this is the opportunity to really hit them hard. Those are the risks. So, I mean, we didn't have in the report Hezbollah or the West Bank or Gaza because the Israelis have shown that they are militarily dominant. They determine the nature of escalation and their enemies can't do anything to them. That includes, frankly, the Iranians. So I certainly accept the fact that the Israelis have defeated their enemies in a pretty spectacular fashion over the last year and a bit following October 7th. I agree with that.

Where you and I probably disagree, and we've had discussions about this in the past, Scott, is that I don't believe that you can resolve the Palestinian problem by blowing them all up. I just don't. I mean, I think that, you know, if Hamas is an army, they're defeated. If Hamas is an ideology and an idea, you probably made them stronger because you've radicalized people for generations and and what I see in Gaza and the lack of humanitarian support and the comparative breadth of bombing and lack of willingness to be accountable for

The the risks of the civilian population And I'm not in any way for the risks of the civilian population. And I'm not in any way trying to say that Israel shouldn't want to blow up Hamas. I absolutely accept terrorist organization. They've done horrible things to the Israelis and to their own population. But ultimately the fact that as a result of this war,

the Palestinians are facing far greater depredation than they were on October 6th. And also the Palestinians in the West Bank have lost a lot more territory. They're living under more of a security state. They are much farther from having a state. I believe that will lead to more radicalism. I believe that will lead to more violence against Israel, against the United States, and more broadly in the region. I believe that. Now, I mean, how do you balance those things? Because again, at the end of the day, Israel is a tiny country.

They're very wealthy. They're incredible in terms of surveillance. If they keep their eyes on the ball, as Netanyahu did not before October 7th, they will have great control over their borders. So, you know, I think in the context of that, you know, maybe they can effectively occupy Palestinian territories and the Palestinians will just live as an imprisoned people. It's possible, and that that won't be a threat to Israel.

I don't believe that that's humane. That's not a world I wanna live in, but I also don't think it's true. So, I mean, even if you don't care about the Palestinians as people, and there are a lot of people that don't, I believe, and I do, but I understand that there are people that just,

you know, have decided that's my enemy and I don't care. But I actually believe that these are people that are industrious, they are capable, and with advanced technologies, they will increasingly find ways to make their voice heard. And I worry about that. I mean And I worry about that. I mean, I worry about that in the same way that I worry about when the CEO of UnitedHealthcare

is assassinated by some pretty boy, idiot, that a whole bunch of people on the internet, and by the way, some establishment Democrats, like seem to lionize the guy. Oh, I understand what he did. This is what happens. You radicalize people, they do crazy shit, and they have supporters. And I worry that the Palestinians are increasingly going to be prone,

larger numbers of them, to do crazy shit with supporters. This idea, and a lot of people hold it, that you, even if you kill, you can kill people, but you can't kill an idea. I would push back and say, we for the most part killed communism. We for the most part, at least we saw killed fascism. And at the end of World War II, we were bombing Hamburg. We killed 40 service or military and killed 40,000 civilians.

And we had already won the war. And when asked the generals and Eisenhower asked why they continued to devastate Hamburg, they said, they need to know they lost. And I know that sounds brutal, but I would argue that we would have done worse had we been as viciously attacked. And two, when you actually look at the data,

specifically the deaths of combatants relative to civilians, that the Israelis are prosecuting this war more humanely than any Western nation has prosecuted another war. Your thoughts. So I accept the fact that the United States in the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan also saw massive amounts of civilian damage and brutality, except to completely. also saw massive amounts of civilian damage and brutality,

except to completely. But let me, I was focused when I said I take exception to the way the Israelis have proselytized this war, I've talked about the utter lack of humanitarian aid getting in to Gaza. And I also talked about taking more land and the greatest security state in the West Bank. And again, I think those things matter. Now I don't think you need, you can blow up Hamas and still allow food in for the Palestinians.

I mean, my view is that if you're a friend of Israel, as I am, you want Israel to do well in sustainably long-term. And that means criticizing Israel when you think it's fucking up. The United States, which has been the strongest supporter of Israel, bar none, no one else is close over the last year, has been incredibly critical, mostly privately, of the fact that not enough aid has gotten in. So, again, my point here is simply that I believe that there's going to be greater radicalization. And we need to move to thinking about how after they've lost. And do they know they've lost? It's not like just the war since October 7. The Palestinians have known that they've lost for decades now.

I mean, they have less and less territory. They've been moved farther and farther out. Their opportunities, economic opportunities, educational opportunities, are more and more constrained. A lot of that is on their own poor governance. Don't get me wrong, it's not just all about Israel. A lot of that's because they were forgotten by the Gulf States. A lot of that's because the Americans don't care about them. The Europeans don't care about them. I mean, no one cares about the Palestinians, except the Palestinians. They do.

The Palestinians care about the Palestinians. And ultimately, I think that's gonna cause a problem. Hasn't Qatar sent over a billion dollars, which they decided to spend on tunnels and rockets? Haven't they been the beneficiary of a tremendous amount of aid? Qatar has been the single biggest supporter on the ground in Gaza over past years. And of course, that's now been cut off.

Absolutely. But if you look at what kind of support the Palestinians have had on the ground to build their economy compared to other countries, actual countries in the region, the answer is very, very little. And look, you know that my mother's side of the family is Armenian. You know, I mean, 125,000 Armenians just ethnically cleansed from Nagorno-Karabakh. And no one's talking about it. You're not going to ask me about it. It's not in our top risk report. We didn't write about it all. Even in ungoverned territories, we didn't bother to mention it because nobody cares. And that's what I'm saying.

Law of the jungle. You know, the fact is we could have a very long conversation about why it got to this situation where 125,000 civilians got tossed out of their homes, left with nothing, places blown up, occupied all their historic monuments, their churches blown up. Nobody talks about it. It bothers me as a person, you know? But the fact is, I mean, look, we talk about the Palestinians because it gets a lot more attention, but we could, there are so many places where these are the same conversations.

But again, I love this because I want to stop you because I feel like I'm sitting across the table from someone I respect immensely and I can have a civil conversation around things I recognize I feel strongly about, but I don't know what I don't know. And that is, you talk about, we're not having these conversations around the 120,000 people who have been disappeared

in Syria under Assad or what's happened in Yemen. Isn't it mostly because when Jews kill people, it's seen as a different crime against humanity than when other people kill people? Isn't there just a tremendous double standard herein? Look, I think that there are all sorts of double standards, Scott, but they don't just go one way. I mean, the Holocaust has been seared in the imagining, the collective historical memory

and the imagination of everyone that lived at that time and since. And, you know, for a long time, the Jews were seen to be like the principal global victim and we all had to ensure that never happened again. Today, that never happened again. Today that is not true. Today Israel is the dominant military actor in the entire Middle East not just vis-a-vis the Palestinians and they are the ones that get to decide. Now we in the United States love an underdog. I think that there has been a shift for a lot of young people in the United States love an underdog. I think that there has been a shift

for a lot of young people in the United States that suddenly don't see support for Israel as support of the underdog. They think that we're somehow the bad guys because like we're in favor of the powerful and not in favor of the oppressed. And the Ukrainians are in the position that the Israelis used to be in.

So I think there's some of that. I think there's been a massive surge in anti-Semitism around the world, very disturbing. And that certainly has to do with the fact there are a hell of a lot more Muslims than there are Jews. And a lot of them are on TikTok, for example. And so you see that performing algorithmically, not because TikTok is nefarious, but just because it performs with those eyeballs. There's some of that. And also the fact that there's just a lot of media occupying that space. You know, I mean, this is an area that has a lot of journalists on the ground and covering it. There ain't no journalists in Sudan or Yemen

writing about it. This part of the world matters economically, technologically, it doesn't. Sudan, nobody cares, right? It doesn't have a market impact. There's no one that's going to school there that's gonna come and talk about it. There's not as much of a diaspora in the West.

There is when you talk about the Israelis and the Palestinians. So I think there are lots of reasons to simplify this to just one factor. You and I would not do that about any other discussion we'd have. We certainly wouldn't want to simplify this in that way. Let me pause again.

First comment, I absolutely love these conversations. So thank you too. You said that TikTok, not because TikTok is nefarious. Another thesis. TikTok is largely influenced, if not controlled by the CCP who has a strategic reason to deposition us or make us weaker. If they can't beat us economically or kinetically,

why wouldn't they put their thumb on the scale of content that polarizes us resulting in 52 pro-Hamas videos for everyone, pro-Israel video, which according to the research I've seen is taking place on TikTok. In some, I would argue TikTok is nefarious and purposely trying to delegitimize or create polarization amongst our public? So I think social media is nefarious. And I agree that TikTok is certainly influenced by the CCP, the Communist Party of China. And we should not trust that. They have said that they are not giving any information

to the Chinese Communist Party. That has been proved in many investigations, Wall Street Journal, other reports to be not true. So I'm not comfortable with the idea that TikTok is just a free market corporation that's only seeking profits and nothing matters. But to the extent that the Chinese have been involved in cyber operations to influence US elections.

And the Russians have been involved, the Iranians and the North Koreans. The Russians are actively promoting information that is trying to increase a sense of racism, rage, violence, hostility, maltreatment. I mean, they're flooding the zone with shit in ways that really is trying to disrupt and undermine US democracy and stability.

China's cyber influence on the US elections was overwhelmingly intelligence seeking. It was get inside the systems to figure out what they're really doing so that we can take advantage from it. It was also get inside critical infrastructure so that just in case things go badly, we might be able to blow these guys up. So I'm someone that believes that I don't know what I don't know. I know what I know. I am not inside.

I know the CEO of TikTok. I've met him many times. I'm not inside their decision-making process. I don't know what they're saying to the Communist Party. But I know what I see, the evidence from what the Chinese have done in other areas. There's no reason for me to believe that that would uniquely and somehow be different

with TikTok than it is with their entire national strategy, which has been risk averse and influence and information maximizing for them directly. It has not been breaking and blowing up the United States. And I also think that there's a much simpler Occam's razor explanation for why young people would get a lot more pro-Islam and pro-Palestinian content than they would get pro-Israel and pro-Jewish. And it's because TikTok is a global platform

with enormous numbers of people from Pakistan and Indonesia on it. And also oriented towards younger people that are already even in the West, much more pro-Palestinian than they are pro-Israel all over the world, and that's just being driven algorithmically. I think that's the simplest argument. So that's how I feel about that. Let's talk about Ukraine. Give us your state of play in Ukraine.

So you'll remember back at the beginning of 2024, you and I talked about this, and I said, and I wasn't happy about it all. I said, I think Ukraine is gonna get partitioned. You were one of the first people that ever said that out loud. I will, I wanna point that out. You said, look, this land, they're never getting it back is essentially what you said. Yeah, and it's, and I mean, I wanna be very clear.

I really don't want that outcome, but you know, it's not for me to be telling everybody what I want. It's it's much more about, you know, sort of where you think things are going. And the Ukrainians, I think increasingly understand that they're now trying to position themselves for the best possible negotiation where they are going to have to lose most, if not all, of the territory that the Russians presently occupy. They'd like a little leverage, which is why they're continuing the offensive in Kursk, which is inside Russia, so that they have something to trade. That's going to make the negotiations more fraught, but does give them leverage. The Russians also are, they benefit from a breather.

I mean, yeah, they've got 15,000 North Korean troops that are not fighting well and are dying in large numbers, but they're having a harder time raising significant numbers of troops for the war effort. And their economy is increasingly performing badly under strain of sanction and lack of human capital. So I think that Trump is gonna succeed in getting a ceasefire.

I don't think it's gonna take a day, it's gonna be hard of any thought, but when he tells the Ukrainians, you need to accept what I'm telling you or else. First of all, he's creating some cover for Zelensky to say, look, I've got no choice now because of the Americans, which is helpful to Zelensky, frankly, but also he does know that the Americans

will cut off aid if he doesn't. So that will move. And the French Macron has also delivered that message just yesterday to Zelensky. He's heard it from the Germans and others. So he's getting that pressure. And the Russians also know, though it's harder to pressure them in this environment, the U.S. has less leverage, they know that if they don't accept negotiations and a ceasefire,

that they're going to get tougher sanctions from Trump. I do believe that. And Trump has delivered that message. I also thought it was very interesting. I mean, Trump's tweets aren't always interesting, but sometimes they are. And there was one he put out a couple of weeks ago that said about Russia-Ukraine that also China can help. And it was very interesting that Trump would say that.

I fully agree with it. China does not benefit from this war continuing. They would like the Russians to have a ceasefire. It is undermining China's relationship with Europe, which especially the frontline states, which they would like to be more stable. It is making it harder for the Chinese to have flexibility globally. They really don't like the Russian North Korea relationship. They want this war over. As you said before, the Chinese need stability. The Russians are chaos actors. So they're not fully aligned war over. As you said before, the Chinese need stability, the Russians are chaos actors.

So they're not fully aligned in this. If I were Trump, I would absolutely reach out to the Chinese to be a part of this solution. And the first Trump, Xi Jinping call is gonna be utterly fascinating for so many reasons, but this is one of them. So just as we wrap up here, Ian, we have a lot of young people listening to this podcast

and are very focused on trying to develop their own careers. And I think a lot of people listen to this and hear about your background in GZERO Media and think, god, that is just such a cool job and business. Just give us just the cliff notes. I would imagine your business is booming. And what is the friction right now in your business? When you look at 2025 as the founder of this consulting firm or media company,

what are you most excited about and most worried about as it relates to being an entrepreneur and building your business? Well, I mean, it's kind of funny because of course, given that we try to help people understand the world when there's more uncertainty, more people need us. And that's true both in terms of the companies that pay us to do consulting and advisory work, and also in terms of the, just the members of the public that engage with our, our media channels and the rest, I mean, we did a lot better

growth wise in the Trump administration than we did in Biden. I mean, you know, leaving aside the fact that tax rates went down, so all the corporates did well under that, but just generally speaking, much more uncertainty driven by the Trump administration. And we already see that starting now. He's certainly acting as president with Biden starting now, he's certainly acting as president with Biden doing much less. I expect that'll be true again. So that's not a point of friction. The point of friction, and I think you'll appreciate this.

So we've got like almost 250 employees, right? For me, that sounds amazing because I started as a kid from the projects and it was just me. Sounds like a headache. Well, I've got to see, yo, it's not like I'm running it. But but I mean, 250 people is a small company in the grand scheme of things. It's a small company. And the biggest point of friction

is that we need to ensure that the best that we make in a given year, there are so many places that we could go and engage in and build the firm. Different types of businesses, different geographies, different sectors we can invest in, different kinds of staff, all sorts of things we can do. And yet as a firm with 250 people, you know, you can only make four or five of those bets in a serious way in any given year. So it's not about who your competitors are globally. It's much more about, you know, marshaling your resources intelligently yourself and making those bets

so they're not singles, but they're, a couple of them are actually home runs that they really, they really do, you know, you're so, you're constrained. I mean, it's kind of like you and I have so many hours in the day, you've got so many hours with the kids before they don't wanna talk to you anymore.

How are you gonna spend that time with them that maximizes it? We've got only so many people and so much money we can deploy. How do we do that in a big world that's rife with opportunity? There's too much opportunity in the world. And there's only one of me and there's only one Eurasia group, only one GZERO Media.

You know, how do you do that? And I'm an optimist, my eyes are always bigger than my stomach, everything can work out. The people around me are meant to sort of, you know, ensure that there is structure and reality around all of that. And I think they do a real good job. to sort of ensure that there is structure and reality around all of that. And I think they do a real good job. Yeah, the charge of any leader is not what to do, but what not to do, how you allocate capital

to its greatest return. Ian Bremmer is the president and founder of Eurasia Group, the world's leading political risk research and consulting firm and GZERO Media, a company dedicated to providing intelligent and engaging coverage of international affairs. He's also the author of 11 books, including the New York Times bestsellers,

Us Versus Them, The Failure of Globalism, and his latest book, The Power of Crisis, How Three Threats and Our Response Will Change the World. Ian, Alec Baldwin has hosted SNL 17 times. You have now been on Prop G seven times. We are catching up fast. You are hands down our favorite guest. You're thoughtful, you're civil, you're creative.

I just love these conversations. Really appreciate your partnership and friendship. All right, brother, take care. Happy New Year. Algebra of happiness. This guy, I think his name is Tyler. I found him on TikTok or Instagram, kind of obsessed with him. He's this former financial advisor that takes these long walks in the woods. It looks like he's in a work camp in Vladivostok and gives financial advice. And I just think he's fantastic what he does. And he said something that impacted me.

He said that, here is the definition of success. A series of small actions every day. And it just, it struck me as so simple, but this is what I hope we're all gonna do, or I'm gonna suggest you do. And I'm gonna try and do the same thing. And that is every day this year, do one small thing, one small thing that's going to add up to something great at the end of the year, 15, 20, 30 minutes

of exercise, it might be a long walk, a text message every day to someone you care about telling them that you care about them. And it might not be, I care about you, but just checking in, hi, how are you? You're going to aggregate those, those text messages are gonna compound. Something for yourself. Create one or two minutes of content every day. I'm gonna write a blog post or a hundred words of a blog post every day.

I'm gonna put out a minute or every three days, I'm gonna put out a video, I'm gonna put out interesting content on a social media platform to try and garner my following. I'm gonna save 10 bucks a day. I'm gonna not, I'm gonna not take an Uber. I'm gonna take the subway and I am not going to buy that latte from Starbucks.

I'm gonna invest 10 bucks every day in Vanguard and ETF or on the Acorns app, whatever it might be, right? A series of small actions every day that add up to something great, especially around relationships. This is our year. It's a series of small actions every day that add up to something great, especially around relationships. This is our year. It's 2025. Everything behind you is gone, it's done, it's immutable.

But 2025 is mutable. Let's start now. This episode is produced by Jennifer Sanchez. Our intern is Dan Shalarm. Drew Burrows is our technical director. It's so nice to see Drew again. So nice to see Drew. He comes over to my house, he sets everything up, he's this nice presence. Thank you for listening to the Proff.G pod from the Vox Media Podcast Network. We will

catch you on Saturday for No Mercy, No Malice as read by George Hahn. And please follow our Proff.G Markets pod wherever you get your pods for new episodes every Monday and Thursday. Woohoo! Support for the show comes from Delta Airlines. Delta believes that every journey should be as unique as you are. So they're leveraging digital tools to put you and your preferences at the center of every trip. Delta is evolving the in-flight entertainment experience with new partnerships,

features and functionalities unlocked by your SkyMiles membership. With fast, free DeltaSync Wi-Fi presented by T-Mobile on most domestic flights and personalized seatback entertainment, there's always something new to discover on Delta. Go to deltaunlocks.com to learn more about the future of travel with Delta.