Stay ConnectedPast Present Future is a bi-weekly History of Ideas podcast with David Runciman, host and creator of Talking Politics, exploring the history of ideas from politics to philosophy, culture to technology. David talks to historians, novelists, scientists and many others about where the most interesting ideas come from, what they mean, and why they matter.
Ideas from the past, questions about the present, shaping the future.
New episodes every Wednesday and Sunday.
Copyright: © Past Present Future
Today’s episode explores the ideas of two late-twentieth-century thinkers who argued that political philosophy needs to be concerned with more than just justice. David talks to Paul Sagar about why Bernard Williams thought we should focus on questions about legitimacy and why Judith Shklar believed we should spend more time worrying about cruelty. Is the fundamental political question about how to achieve the best or is it about how to avoid the worst? And if it’s the second, where should we start?
Out tomorrow on PPF+: a bonus episode to accompany this series in which David and Paul talk about how personal experience shapes our political and philosophical outlook – a conversation exploring luck, accidents, human frailty and human connection. To get this and all our bonus episodes plus ad-free listening for £5 a month or £50 for the year, sign up to PPF+ now https://www.ppfideas.com/join-ppf-plus
Paul Sagar’s Substack is called Diary of a Punter – it is highly recommended https://substack.com/@diaryofapunter
Next Time: Where Are We Going? Nuclear Weapons
You can find out everything you need to know about this podcast – who we are, what we do, plus merch, events and full lists of our episodes and PPF+ bonus episodes on our website https://www.ppfideas.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
In the third part of our series David and Paul Sagar explore what the German writer and sociologist Max Weber can teach us about the pitfalls of political life and political philosophy. Why is doing politics so hard? Why is it so hard to know what to do for the best when all the options are bad ones? How can we still do our best when the only means at our disposal is violence? And where does all this leave the prospects for lasting political change?
Next Time: Learning from Bernard Williams and Judith Shklar
You can find out everything you need to know about this podcast – who we are, what we do, plus merch, events and full lists of our episodes and PPF+ bonus episodes on our website https://www.ppfideas.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
In the second episode in our short series about how the history of ideas can help with the deepest puzzles of politics, David talks to political theorist Paul Sagar about the eighteenth-century polymath Adam Smith. Normally thought of as the original champion of free-market economics, Smith was far more interested in history, human psychology and the problems inherent in all political systems. What does it mean to live in a commercial society? How should we understand the promise and pitfalls of equality? Where does human liberty come from? And why has the Adam Smith Institute made a mockery of his name?
Next time: Learning from Max Weber
You can find out everything you need to know about this podcast – who we are, what we do, plus merch, events and full lists of our episodes and PPF+ bonus episodes on our website https://www.ppfideas.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today it’s the first episode in a new series asking why contemporary political philosophy struggles to make sense of the deepest problems of politics and exploring how the history of ideas might help. David talks to political theorist Paul Sagar about why looking for justice might be the wrong place to start. Instead, Paul suggests we start with Aristotle, for whom the search for justice was the problem not the solution. So what should we do instead?
To keep up with what’s coming next and for more news about the podcast do follow us on Bluesky: @ppfideas.bsky.social
Next time: Learning from Adam Smith
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today’s episode is the second part of David’s conversation with Helen Thompson about what makes living in a world dominated by the United States so strange. What has changed about American power in the twenty-first century? Is Trump a deviation from the norm or is he simply an extension of it? Why does Greenland matter? And what is at stake as the contest between the US and China ramps up to the next level?
Next Time: What’s Wrong with Political Philosophy?
Incogni Special Offer for PPF listeners: https://incogni.com/pastpresentfuture (then use code PPF for 60% off annual plans)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
The first of a two-part conversation in which David talks to Helen Thompson about how to understand the extraordinary and unlikely power of the United States, from its origins to its current incarnation. How strange would it once have seemed to live in a world dominated by a state from the Western hemisphere? When did the US overcome its natural disadvantages to achieve superpower potential? What does the rest of the world get wrong about how American power actually operates? And what might come next?
A reminder that the second part of David’s conversation with Glen Rangwala about the trial and execution of Saddam Hussein is available now on PPF+. To get this and all our bonus episodes plus ad-free listening sign up to PPF+ today https://www.ppfideas.com/join-ppf-plus
Next Time: The Weirdness of American Power Part 2 – Trump and the Future
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
For the final episode in this series David talks to historian and political scientist Glen Rangwala about the trial and execution of Saddam Hussein in 2006. What plans did the Americans have for Saddam before the Iraq war began? How was it decided what to charge him with once he had been captured? Did his trial exacerbate rather than overcome the sectarian divisions tearing Iraq apart? Was justice served?
Part 2 of this conversation, in which David and Glen discuss the circumstances of Saddam’s execution and the legacy of his fate for the politics of Iraq and the wider world, is available tomorrow on PPF+. To get this and all our bonus episodes plus ad-free listening sign up to PPF+ now https://www.ppfideas.com/join-ppf-plus
Next time: Talking Geopolitics with Helen Thompson – The Weirdness of American Power
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
For the penultimate episode in this series David examines the criminal trial of O. J. Simpson in 1995 to ask what it reveals about how power really works in America. How did the prosecution fail to grasp what was really happening in the courtroom? Did jury selection decide the outcome of the case before it had even begun? Why was the massive volume of evidence against Simpson something that worked in his favour? And how does the legacy of the Simpson trial help explain the arrival of Donald Trump in the White House?
Next time: The Trial and Execution of Saddam Hussein
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
In today’s episode David explores the trial that gripped China at the end of 1980: the case against the three men and one woman accused of being responsible for the worst excesses of the Cultural Revolution (1966-76). How did the court try to hold Mao’s followers responsible for the catastrophe while exculpating Mao himself? How did Mao’s widow Jiang Qing fight back? Who were the others in the dock and what were they doing there? And what made the trial emblematic of the new direction China was taking?
Next time in Politics on Trial: O. J. Simpson vs the Evidence
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today’s episode is about the epic battle between Muhammad Ali and the US government over its attempt to draft him during the Vietnam war and what happened when that fight reached the US Supreme Court. What were Ali’s grounds for claiming to be a conscientious objector? How did that argument cut across wider questions of race, religion and power? Why did the Supreme Court change its original decision against Ali to find unanimously in his favour? And who won and who lost as a result?
Out now on PPF+: Part two of David’s conversation with Robert Saunders about the fight over Irish Home Rule: how close did Britain get to an actual civil war in 1914 before another war intervened? To hear this and all our bonus episodes plus ad-free listening sign up to PPF+ now https://www.ppfideas.com/join-ppf-plus
Next time in Politics on Trial: The Gang of Four
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Our TOPPODCAST Picks 
