This is Thinking in Public, a program dedicated to intelligent conversation about

frontline theological and cultural issues with the people who are shaping them.

I'm Albert Mole, your host and president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky.

Patrick J. Dunine is the David A. Patensiani Memorial College Chair of Constitutional Studies and Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame.

Professor Denine earned his PhD in Political Science from Rutgers University.

He's held teaching positions at Princeton University and Georgetown University before joining the faculty at Notre Dame in 2012.

He served in various capacities he has authored or edited many books including his influential work,

Why Liberalism failed.

That book was the topic of a previous episode

of Thinking in Public.

It is his most recent book, Regime Change,

toward a post-liberal future that is the topic of our conversation today.

Professor Danine, I really enjoyed our conversation about your 2018 book, Why Liberalism Fail.

And in some essence, everything an author does has at least some

reference to what he's done before. So draw a line from that book to why you

wrote this book. What are you doing in this new book entitled Regime Chain?

Sure. Well, first let me echo how much I enjoyed our last conversation in 2018 and I just would mention that that was a time of like extraordinary number of

invitations to participate in podcasts and the conversation that we had I thought had

so much depth that it was almost a surprise to me at that point that I was able to say some things that I was not being asked in in other interviews so I'm hoping that we will at least match if not exceed those standards today. Let's do this yeah this book in many ways is, you know, it's in many ways a follow-up to the previous book. And if anything, it's an effort to respond to a number of the criticisms that the last book received, which really focused on that that

whether people agreed or disagree, they thought it was a powerful critique of the liberal order, but that it lacked a kind of positive project or a

recommendation of sort of what's next. And so this, it doesn't, I wouldn't say this is a, you know, fully drawn portrait of what that might look like, but it's an effort to articulate a way of thinking forward from where we are right now.

And I think the title suggests that as well of course.

...