WEBVTT 00:00:00.699 --> 00:00:04.360 Imagine the definitive global ranking of freedom, 00:00:04.940 --> 00:00:08.140 like the metric that literally shapes billions 00:00:08.140 --> 00:00:10.740 of dollars in U .S. foreign aid. Right, the index 00:00:10.740 --> 00:00:13.630 that splashes across the front pages of major 00:00:13.630 --> 00:00:17.030 newspapers worldwide every single year. Exactly. 00:00:17.530 --> 00:00:19.949 Now imagine that for decades that globally defining 00:00:19.949 --> 00:00:22.929 score was decided by, well, practically one guy. 00:00:22.989 --> 00:00:26.149 Yeah, a single person using what he openly called 00:00:26.149 --> 00:00:29.609 an intuitive rating system. It is just wild. 00:00:29.690 --> 00:00:32.869 That is the messy, highly controversial and absolutely 00:00:32.869 --> 00:00:35.770 fascinating reality behind Freedom House. Welcome 00:00:35.770 --> 00:00:38.270 to the deep dive. Glad to be here. Today we are 00:00:38.270 --> 00:00:40.960 looking at the complex deeply influential machinery 00:00:40.960 --> 00:00:44.020 behind this preeminent American nonprofit. And 00:00:44.020 --> 00:00:45.939 our source material today is drawn directly from 00:00:45.939 --> 00:00:48.299 the comprehensive Wikipedia article on Freedom 00:00:48.299 --> 00:00:49.840 House. Right. And the mission here is really 00:00:49.840 --> 00:00:52.759 to figure out how an organization born in 1941 00:00:52.759 --> 00:00:55.520 attempts to mathematically quantify something 00:00:55.520 --> 00:00:58.420 as abstract as liberty. Yeah. And how its grading 00:00:58.420 --> 00:01:00.820 methods have evolved and honestly how it manages 00:01:00.820 --> 00:01:04.540 to draw intense synchronized criticism from almost 00:01:04.540 --> 00:01:06.799 every point on the global political spectrum. 00:01:07.319 --> 00:01:10.200 OK, let's unpack this. Because the origin story 00:01:10.200 --> 00:01:12.780 of Freedom House is, well, it's not what I expected 00:01:12.780 --> 00:01:14.920 at all. It rarely is. I mean, when people hear 00:01:14.920 --> 00:01:17.500 phrases like think tank or research institute, 00:01:17.900 --> 00:01:20.519 they usually picture quiet, sterile rooms. Yes, 00:01:20.579 --> 00:01:22.819 absolutely. Like academics in tweed jackets pouring 00:01:22.819 --> 00:01:25.959 over data. Exactly. Completely detached and passive. 00:01:26.739 --> 00:01:30.140 But Freedom House was born in a state of absolute 00:01:30.140 --> 00:01:32.439 urgency and action. Yeah, we're talking October 00:01:32.439 --> 00:01:36.909 31st, 1941. the world is quite literally on fire. 00:01:37.189 --> 00:01:39.530 World War II is raging across Europe and Asia. 00:01:39.680 --> 00:01:41.480 even though the U .S. hasn't officially entered 00:01:41.480 --> 00:01:44.219 the conflict yet. And the founders of this organization 00:01:44.219 --> 00:01:46.980 are massive historical heavyweights. You've got 00:01:46.980 --> 00:01:49.079 First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt. Wendell Willkie 00:01:49.079 --> 00:01:51.480 is there too. Yeah, and Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia. 00:01:51.739 --> 00:01:53.379 But they weren't just sitting around writing 00:01:53.379 --> 00:01:56.299 dry white papers about the philosophical concept 00:01:56.299 --> 00:01:58.780 of liberty. They were actively fighting access 00:01:58.780 --> 00:02:01.340 propaganda on the front lines of public opinion. 00:02:01.700 --> 00:02:03.700 What's fascinating here is the methodology they 00:02:03.700 --> 00:02:06.700 used. They actually acquired a 19 -room building 00:02:06.700 --> 00:02:09.789 in New York City. Yeah. And it wasn't just office 00:02:09.789 --> 00:02:12.069 space, right? It had a broadcasting studio. Yeah, 00:02:12.229 --> 00:02:15.069 fully operational broadcasting facility. They 00:02:15.069 --> 00:02:17.650 were directly sponsoring radio programs, programs 00:02:17.650 --> 00:02:21.129 with incredibly dramatic names like our secret 00:02:21.129 --> 00:02:23.280 weapon. Which is just a great name for a show. 00:02:23.500 --> 00:02:27.039 It really is. This was a CBS radio series created 00:02:27.039 --> 00:02:31.039 specifically to counter Axis shortwave radio 00:02:31.039 --> 00:02:34.180 propaganda. They had Rex Stout, the famous mystery 00:02:34.180 --> 00:02:36.580 writer. Exactly. Rex Stout getting on the mic 00:02:36.580 --> 00:02:39.000 to systematically rebut the most entertaining 00:02:39.000 --> 00:02:41.500 lies the Axis powers had broadcast that week. 00:02:41.819 --> 00:02:43.939 And the whole operation was produced by Paul 00:02:43.939 --> 00:02:46.520 White, the legendary founder of CBS News. Wow. 00:02:46.780 --> 00:02:49.099 I mean, when you read about it, it feels less 00:02:49.099 --> 00:02:52.370 like a traditional nonprofit. and more like a 00:02:52.370 --> 00:02:55.250 modern think tank running a rogue podcast or 00:02:55.250 --> 00:02:57.629 like a pirate radio station today. That's a great 00:02:57.629 --> 00:02:59.490 analogy because it highlights their inherent 00:02:59.490 --> 00:03:01.949 operational DNA. I mean, from day one, Freedom 00:03:01.949 --> 00:03:04.490 House was not a passive academic observer taking 00:03:04.490 --> 00:03:06.650 notes from the sidelines. They were an active 00:03:06.650 --> 00:03:09.729 participant in shaping public opinion and heavily 00:03:09.729 --> 00:03:12.830 supporting U .S. foreign policy goals. They were 00:03:12.830 --> 00:03:14.930 aggressively interventionist. But wait, this 00:03:14.930 --> 00:03:16.930 is where I get a little confused. World War Two 00:03:16.930 --> 00:03:19.990 ends. The Axis powers are defeated. Shouldn't 00:03:19.990 --> 00:03:22.750 a war time propaganda group just you know pack 00:03:22.750 --> 00:03:24.770 up the microphones and go home you would think 00:03:24.770 --> 00:03:27.710 so like how do they justify sticking around when 00:03:27.710 --> 00:03:29.949 their primary enemy has surrendered well they 00:03:29.949 --> 00:03:32.610 didn't pack up they simply pivoted to the new 00:03:32.610 --> 00:03:35.770 geopolitical reality the new global threat from 00:03:35.770 --> 00:03:38.590 their perspective was communism oh of course 00:03:38.590 --> 00:03:41.539 the Cold War Exactly. Throughout the Cold War, 00:03:41.699 --> 00:03:44.120 they started vigorously supporting the Marshall 00:03:44.120 --> 00:03:47.439 Plan, the establishment of NATO, and even the 00:03:47.439 --> 00:03:49.400 Johnson administration's policies in the Vietnam 00:03:49.400 --> 00:03:51.800 War. Wow. Okay. Yeah. They viewed the spread 00:03:51.800 --> 00:03:54.479 of Western -style democracy as the ultimate weapon 00:03:54.479 --> 00:03:58.979 against totalitarian ideologies. active, fiercely 00:03:58.979 --> 00:04:01.919 policy -driven stance created some incredibly 00:04:01.919 --> 00:04:05.020 complex domestic paradoxes. Yeah, the relationship 00:04:05.020 --> 00:04:06.639 with the American Civil Rights Movement is a 00:04:06.639 --> 00:04:08.780 perfect example of that friction. On one hand, 00:04:08.819 --> 00:04:11.219 during the 1950s and 60s, they supported the 00:04:11.219 --> 00:04:13.080 movement. Right, they gave out awards. Yeah, 00:04:13.080 --> 00:04:15.460 they awarded Martin Luther King Jr. and Medgar 00:04:15.460 --> 00:04:18.680 Evers their annual Freedom Award in 1963. But 00:04:18.680 --> 00:04:21.220 then, just a few years later, they completely 00:04:21.220 --> 00:04:23.740 turned on Dr. King and severely criticized him. 00:04:23.759 --> 00:04:25.899 And that was because of his anti -war activism. 00:04:25.899 --> 00:04:28.180 Right. After King started speaking out against 00:04:28.180 --> 00:04:31.560 the Vietnam War, Freedom House, which, remember, 00:04:31.959 --> 00:04:33.939 actively supported the Johnson administration's 00:04:33.939 --> 00:04:37.259 war policies, publicly rebuked him. It's wild. 00:04:37.420 --> 00:04:39.300 They accused him of aligning with what they called 00:04:39.300 --> 00:04:42.759 well -known communist allies. It perfectly encapsulates 00:04:42.759 --> 00:04:46.079 their rigid geopolitical focus. I mean, if you 00:04:46.079 --> 00:04:48.759 align with their anti -communist, pro -U .S. 00:04:49.019 --> 00:04:51.899 worldview... They championed you. If you deviated, 00:04:52.139 --> 00:04:54.019 even if you were an absolute icon of domestic 00:04:54.019 --> 00:04:56.860 civil rights, they pushed back hard. So how does 00:04:56.860 --> 00:04:59.980 a group of radio broadcasting policy shaping 00:04:59.980 --> 00:05:03.079 Cold War activists transform into the world's 00:05:03.079 --> 00:05:05.199 primary greater of global democracy? Like, how 00:05:05.199 --> 00:05:08.060 do they make the leap from fighting Soviet propaganda 00:05:08.060 --> 00:05:11.480 to handing out authoritative global report cards? 00:05:11.639 --> 00:05:14.720 Well, that shift really crystallizes in the 1970s. 00:05:14.879 --> 00:05:16.720 Freedom House starts publishing an annual report 00:05:16.720 --> 00:05:19.120 called Freedom in the World. And this quickly 00:05:19.120 --> 00:05:22.660 becomes their flagship product. Since 1973, they've 00:05:22.660 --> 00:05:24.480 been assessing the state of civil liberties and 00:05:24.480 --> 00:05:28.560 political rights in 195 countries and 15 territories. 00:05:28.759 --> 00:05:31.139 That's a lot of ground to cover. It is. And they 00:05:31.139 --> 00:05:33.139 distill all that complexity into three simple 00:05:33.139 --> 00:05:37.560 grades. Free, partially free, or not free. And 00:05:37.560 --> 00:05:39.920 over time, they expanded this model, launching 00:05:39.920 --> 00:05:41.980 freedom of the press and freedom on the net. 00:05:42.240 --> 00:05:44.860 Okay, but here is where I really have to push 00:05:44.860 --> 00:05:47.279 back on their whole system. When you look at 00:05:47.279 --> 00:05:50.160 how they actually calculated these massive globally 00:05:50.160 --> 00:05:52.959 influential grades in those early decades, it 00:05:52.959 --> 00:05:55.279 wasn't a team of hundreds of independent data 00:05:55.279 --> 00:05:57.339 scientists cross -referencing field reports. 00:05:57.439 --> 00:06:00.079 No, not at all. For nearly 20 years, from the 00:06:00.079 --> 00:06:03.339 1970s to 1990, the Freedom in the World rankings 00:06:03.339 --> 00:06:06.420 were practically a one -man show. Yes, a political 00:06:06.420 --> 00:06:09.439 scientist named Raymond Gastille. For years, 00:06:09.540 --> 00:06:11.699 he essentially produced the entire global report 00:06:11.699 --> 00:06:13.740 on his own, sometimes with the help of his wife. 00:06:13.959 --> 00:06:16.019 Just him and his wife. Basically, yeah. He was 00:06:16.019 --> 00:06:17.420 the one reading the news clippings, assessing 00:06:17.420 --> 00:06:19.560 the political rights, and assigning the scores 00:06:19.560 --> 00:06:22.240 for every single nation on earth. Wait, so for 00:06:22.240 --> 00:06:25.589 decades... The definitive global freedom index 00:06:25.589 --> 00:06:28.730 was basically one guy's intuitive vibes because 00:06:28.730 --> 00:06:31.170 he literally called it a loose intuitive rating 00:06:31.170 --> 00:06:33.649 system. He did. Yes. That sounds like a figure 00:06:33.649 --> 00:06:36.269 skating judge handing out Olympic medals based 00:06:36.269 --> 00:06:39.269 on their own personal aesthetic rather than a 00:06:39.269 --> 00:06:41.990 strict objective rubric. It's a highly subjective 00:06:41.990 --> 00:06:44.410 foundation without a doubt. Yeah. And what's 00:06:44.410 --> 00:06:46.290 fascinating here is that when modern academics 00:06:46.290 --> 00:06:48.870 actually dug into the historical numbers they 00:06:48.870 --> 00:06:53.420 found serious quantifiable flaws. Really? mathematical 00:06:53.420 --> 00:06:56.500 bias. A researcher named Kenneth A. Bolen, along 00:06:56.500 --> 00:06:59.560 with Nils D. Steiner, analyzed that specific 00:06:59.560 --> 00:07:02.240 era of Gasteel's ratings. They estimated that 00:07:02.240 --> 00:07:04.480 Gasteel's method produced a mathematical bias 00:07:04.480 --> 00:07:07.500 of 0 .38 standard deviations against communist 00:07:07.500 --> 00:07:10.779 countries and an even larger bias of 0 .5 standard 00:07:10.779 --> 00:07:12.939 deviations favoring Christian countries. OK, 00:07:12.959 --> 00:07:15.639 standard deviations can sound a bit abstract. 00:07:15.819 --> 00:07:17.759 What does that actually mean in practical terms 00:07:17.759 --> 00:07:19.600 for a country getting graded? Walk me through 00:07:19.600 --> 00:07:22.319 the mechanics of that bias. Sure. To put that 00:07:22.319 --> 00:07:24.420 in perspective, just Just by having a communist 00:07:24.420 --> 00:07:27.079 government, a country's score was automatically 00:07:27.079 --> 00:07:29.620 dragged down by a mathematically massive chunk. 00:07:29.639 --> 00:07:32.779 Oh wow. Completely regardless of what actual 00:07:32.779 --> 00:07:35.079 day -to -day civil liberties existed on the ground. 00:07:35.699 --> 00:07:38.079 Conversely, simply being a Christian majority 00:07:38.079 --> 00:07:41.560 nation artificially inflated your score. So it 00:07:41.560 --> 00:07:44.839 wasn't just a slight subconscious lean. The math 00:07:44.839 --> 00:07:47.680 shows the ruler itself was warped. The tape measure 00:07:47.680 --> 00:07:50.759 was literally weighted to favor one side. Exactly. 00:07:51.529 --> 00:07:55.310 To be fair to Freedom House post 1990, they recognized 00:07:55.310 --> 00:07:57.709 this extreme limitation. They finally hired some 00:07:57.709 --> 00:08:00.149 help. Yeah, they hired a full team, diversified 00:08:00.149 --> 00:08:02.389 their evaluators, and the methodology became 00:08:02.389 --> 00:08:04.769 much more formalized with standardized checklists. 00:08:05.449 --> 00:08:08.629 Their data became so highly regarded that massive 00:08:08.629 --> 00:08:10.730 U .S. government entities like the Millennium 00:08:10.730 --> 00:08:13.370 Challenge Corporation started relying heavily 00:08:13.370 --> 00:08:15.949 on Freedom House data. Right. To determine which 00:08:15.949 --> 00:08:17.970 foreign countries were actually eligible for 00:08:17.970 --> 00:08:20.490 U .S. financial aid. Right. It became very official. 00:08:20.600 --> 00:08:23.699 But you can't really discuss the potential biases 00:08:23.699 --> 00:08:26.120 in a grading system without looking at who is 00:08:26.120 --> 00:08:28.120 paying the teacher's salary. Very true. Let's 00:08:28.120 --> 00:08:30.500 follow the money here, because if you look at 00:08:30.500 --> 00:08:33.659 their bank accounts, the picture gets incredibly 00:08:33.659 --> 00:08:36.919 clear and honestly highly precarious for an organization 00:08:36.919 --> 00:08:39.860 claiming global objectivity. Well, it's a fundamental 00:08:39.860 --> 00:08:43.659 rule of institutional analysis to truly understand 00:08:43.659 --> 00:08:46.460 an organization's output. You have to look closely 00:08:46.460 --> 00:08:49.779 at its input. So let's look at their 2022 financials. 00:08:49.789 --> 00:08:53.809 That year, Freedom House reported about $93 .7 00:08:53.809 --> 00:08:57.789 million in total revenue. Out of that $93 .7 00:08:57.789 --> 00:09:02.509 million, a staggering $79 .6 million came from 00:09:02.509 --> 00:09:05.809 federal grants, mostly from the U .S. State Department 00:09:05.809 --> 00:09:08.970 and USO Day. That is an overwhelming percentage 00:09:08.970 --> 00:09:11.669 of their operating budget. It's almost 85%. I 00:09:11.669 --> 00:09:13.250 mean, think about it like this. If you read a 00:09:13.250 --> 00:09:15.230 massive scientific study about the health benefits 00:09:15.230 --> 00:09:17.309 of nutrition, and then you flip to the back and 00:09:17.309 --> 00:09:19.750 saw that 85 % of the scientists' funding came 00:09:19.750 --> 00:09:22.129 directly from a global soda company. You'd be 00:09:22.129 --> 00:09:23.990 pretty skeptical. You'd inherently squint at 00:09:23.990 --> 00:09:25.730 the results, right? Yeah. You couldn't help but 00:09:25.730 --> 00:09:28.110 wonder if the money influenced the conclusion. 00:09:28.429 --> 00:09:30.870 If we connect this to the bigger picture, when 00:09:30.870 --> 00:09:33.289 the U .S. State Department is effectively your 00:09:33.289 --> 00:09:36.750 angel investor, providing 85 % of your cash, 00:09:36.919 --> 00:09:40.440 Your entire operational model is at the mercy 00:09:40.440 --> 00:09:43.659 of whoever occupies the Oval Office. And remember, 00:09:44.159 --> 00:09:46.720 federal grants aren't blank checks. They're tied 00:09:46.720 --> 00:09:50.240 to specific foreign policy initiatives. You are 00:09:50.240 --> 00:09:52.320 always one election away from an existential 00:09:52.320 --> 00:09:54.960 crisis. And that exact crisis hit them like a 00:09:54.960 --> 00:09:58.259 freight train in 2025. Yes, it did. The incoming 00:09:58.259 --> 00:10:01.120 Trump administration instituted a massive foreign 00:10:01.120 --> 00:10:04.899 aid freeze through executive order 14169. So 00:10:04.899 --> 00:10:07.220 what actually happens inside an organization 00:10:07.220 --> 00:10:09.779 when 80 percent of its funding vanishes overnight? 00:10:09.980 --> 00:10:11.580 It's not just a matter of tightening the belt 00:10:11.580 --> 00:10:13.419 or canceling the holiday party, right? Like, 00:10:13.559 --> 00:10:15.740 what are the mechanics of that collapse? It is 00:10:15.740 --> 00:10:18.120 a catastrophic operational collapse. Because 00:10:18.120 --> 00:10:20.480 of that executive order, Freedom House was forced 00:10:20.480 --> 00:10:22.700 to suddenly terminate over 80 percent of their 00:10:22.700 --> 00:10:25.279 global programs. Over 80 percent? That's insane. 00:10:25.529 --> 00:10:27.549 Yeah, they had to lay off a massive portion of 00:10:27.549 --> 00:10:29.710 their staff. I mean, imagine trying to monitor 00:10:29.710 --> 00:10:32.649 human rights violations across 195 countries 00:10:32.649 --> 00:10:36.509 when suddenly you have no field teams, no regional 00:10:36.509 --> 00:10:38.450 directors and no travel budget. They're just 00:10:38.450 --> 00:10:41.389 stuck in Washington. Right. They had to desperately 00:10:41.389 --> 00:10:43.950 divert whatever internal funds they could just 00:10:43.950 --> 00:10:46.850 to keep their flagship freedom in the world report 00:10:46.850 --> 00:10:50.049 alive. They were suddenly scrambling for private 00:10:50.049 --> 00:10:53.360 donations. to fill an insurmountable gap. Because 00:10:53.360 --> 00:10:55.879 of this intense historical reliance on U .S. 00:10:56.139 --> 00:10:58.539 government funding, Freedom House acts as a massive 00:10:58.539 --> 00:11:01.320 target for criticism. Oh definitely. And as analysts 00:11:01.320 --> 00:11:03.720 trying to understand this group What's fascinating 00:11:03.720 --> 00:11:06.039 to us isn't picking a side in these political 00:11:06.039 --> 00:11:08.559 fights. It's the fact that they managed to make 00:11:08.559 --> 00:11:11.700 enemies out of entirely opposing political camps. 00:11:11.879 --> 00:11:14.139 The sheer breadth of the criticism is what's 00:11:14.139 --> 00:11:16.200 truly remarkable. Now, before we go any further, 00:11:16.200 --> 00:11:19.159 I need to make something very clear. As hosts, 00:11:19.279 --> 00:11:22.379 we are strictly impartial here. We are not taking 00:11:22.379 --> 00:11:24.840 sides or endorsing any of the following political 00:11:24.840 --> 00:11:28.039 viewpoints. Absolutely. We are impartially reporting 00:11:28.039 --> 00:11:30.259 the arguments contained in the source text to 00:11:30.259 --> 00:11:32.100 provide a complete picture of the controversy. 00:11:32.240 --> 00:11:34.600 Exactly. We're just looking at the facts of who 00:11:34.600 --> 00:11:37.200 is criticizing them. So let's look at how the 00:11:37.200 --> 00:11:39.679 political left views them first. Prominent left 00:11:39.679 --> 00:11:42.259 wing academics like Noam Chomsky and Edward S. 00:11:42.360 --> 00:11:45.419 Herman argue that Freedom House basically acts 00:11:45.419 --> 00:11:48.200 as a PR wing for U .S. foreign policy. Right. 00:11:48.490 --> 00:11:51.269 Their critique is that Freedom House is excessively 00:11:51.269 --> 00:11:54.250 harsh on states opposed to U .S. interests and 00:11:54.250 --> 00:11:56.570 way too lenient on regimes that support the U 00:11:56.570 --> 00:11:59.490 .S. They point out that in the 1980s Freedom 00:11:59.490 --> 00:12:01.929 House found the elections in El Salvador, which 00:12:01.929 --> 00:12:04.230 was a staunch U .S. ally with a horrific human 00:12:04.230 --> 00:12:06.250 rights record at the time. They called those 00:12:06.250 --> 00:12:08.580 elections admirable. Yeah, the argument from 00:12:08.580 --> 00:12:11.220 the left is that they provide a veneer of academic 00:12:11.220 --> 00:12:13.600 legitimacy to whatever the State Department wants 00:12:13.600 --> 00:12:15.500 to do. OK, so the left thinks they're just a 00:12:15.500 --> 00:12:18.460 PR firm for U .S. imperialism, but that means 00:12:18.460 --> 00:12:20.879 conservatives must love them, right? Because 00:12:20.879 --> 00:12:23.179 they are reinforcing U .S. power. You would certainly 00:12:23.179 --> 00:12:27.220 think so. But in 2004, former U .S. representative 00:12:27.220 --> 00:12:30.200 and libertarian Ron Paul accused Freedom House 00:12:30.200 --> 00:12:32.580 of meddling in the internal affairs of a sovereign 00:12:32.580 --> 00:12:36.480 nation. Meddling how? Well, he pointed out that 00:12:36.480 --> 00:12:38.639 Freedom House, using millions of dollars from 00:12:38.639 --> 00:12:41.919 US -eyed, funded non -governmental organizations 00:12:41.919 --> 00:12:45.139 in Ukraine that were blatantly favoring presidential 00:12:45.139 --> 00:12:48.279 candidate Viktor Yushchenko. Oh, wow. And the 00:12:48.279 --> 00:12:51.320 conservative pushback didn't stop there. By 2018, 00:12:51.440 --> 00:12:54.039 the National Review, which is a major conservative 00:12:54.039 --> 00:12:56.639 magazine, was writing articles accusing Freedom 00:12:56.639 --> 00:12:59.500 House of having an anti -conservative bias. Interesting. 00:12:59.899 --> 00:13:01.779 Yeah. They claimed the organization had abandoned 00:13:01.779 --> 00:13:04.740 its Cold War anti -communist roots and morphed 00:13:04.740 --> 00:13:08.419 into a progressive partisan NGO that unfairly 00:13:08.419 --> 00:13:10.840 penalized conservative governments in its global 00:13:10.840 --> 00:13:13.200 rankings. So you have Chomsky on the left saying 00:13:13.200 --> 00:13:16.159 it's a tool of US hegemony and the National Review 00:13:16.159 --> 00:13:18.240 on the right saying it's a partisan progressive 00:13:18.240 --> 00:13:20.259 activist group. They really can't win. No, they 00:13:20.259 --> 00:13:22.700 can't. But the critiques go much deeper than 00:13:22.700 --> 00:13:25.539 domestic US politics. They strike at the very 00:13:25.539 --> 00:13:28.019 core of how Freedom House actually defines the 00:13:28.019 --> 00:13:30.480 word freedom. Right. The academic critiques really 00:13:30.480 --> 00:13:33.039 highlight this. Academic Wenfang Tang points 00:13:33.039 --> 00:13:35.580 out that Freedom House uses criteria developed 00:13:35.580 --> 00:13:38.740 exclusively by Western elites. Yes, the cultural 00:13:38.740 --> 00:13:41.639 bias argument. Exactly. For example, Freedom 00:13:41.639 --> 00:13:44.519 House scores China near zero for freedom and 00:13:44.519 --> 00:13:47.419 human rights. But Tang points to data from the 00:13:47.419 --> 00:13:49.940 World Values Survey showing that 72 percent of 00:13:49.940 --> 00:13:52.799 Chinese respondents report being highly satisfied 00:13:52.799 --> 00:13:54.840 with the state of human rights in their country. 00:13:54.919 --> 00:13:57.980 Which is a massive discrepancy. Huge. He argues 00:13:58.029 --> 00:13:59.850 Freedom House is measuring countries against 00:13:59.850 --> 00:14:03.190 a strict Western standard of individualism, completely 00:14:03.190 --> 00:14:05.710 ignoring the subjective cultural values of the 00:14:05.710 --> 00:14:08.110 people actually living there. And Daniel Treisman, 00:14:08.309 --> 00:14:11.149 a political scientist at UCLA, points out glaring 00:14:11.149 --> 00:14:13.269 inconsistencies in their comparative rankings. 00:14:13.809 --> 00:14:15.990 He notes that Freedom House has ranked Russia's 00:14:15.990 --> 00:14:18.570 political rights on the exact same level as the 00:14:18.570 --> 00:14:21.450 United Arab Emirates. Wait, really? The exact 00:14:21.450 --> 00:14:24.149 same score? Yes. And regardless of one's view 00:14:24.149 --> 00:14:26.929 of Russia, Treisman points out that the UAE is 00:14:26.929 --> 00:14:29.539 a federal of absolute monarchies with absolutely 00:14:29.539 --> 00:14:32.740 zero elements of democracy. Ranking them as politically 00:14:32.740 --> 00:14:35.720 identical exposes a deep flaw in the methodology, 00:14:36.360 --> 00:14:38.019 especially when you compare it to other academic 00:14:38.019 --> 00:14:40.980 scales like Polity 4, which score them very differently 00:14:40.980 --> 00:14:43.259 based on actual institutional structures. And 00:14:43.259 --> 00:14:45.620 unsurprisingly, countries that get bad grades 00:14:45.620 --> 00:14:48.279 don't just sit back and take it. The international 00:14:48.279 --> 00:14:52.139 backlash is intense. In 2019 and 2020, China 00:14:52.139 --> 00:14:54.340 placed heavy sanctions on Freedom House and its 00:14:54.340 --> 00:14:56.480 president for intervening in Hong Kong affairs. 00:14:56.460 --> 00:15:00.679 And in May 2024, Russia officially declared Freedom 00:15:00.679 --> 00:15:03.919 House an undesirable organization. But perhaps 00:15:03.919 --> 00:15:06.080 the most explosive international claim comes 00:15:06.080 --> 00:15:08.480 from Craig Murray, who was the British ambassador 00:15:08.480 --> 00:15:11.299 to Uzbekistan in the early 2000s. Right. This 00:15:11.299 --> 00:15:14.840 is a very heavy allegation. This detail is wild. 00:15:15.360 --> 00:15:17.919 Murray wrote that in 2003, the executive director 00:15:17.919 --> 00:15:20.179 of Freedom House actually told him that the organization 00:15:20.179 --> 00:15:22.720 decided to deliberately back off from spotlighting 00:15:22.720 --> 00:15:25.159 human rights abuses in Uzbekistan. Which is shocking 00:15:25.159 --> 00:15:28.250 for a human rights monitor. Exactly. And why? 00:15:28.710 --> 00:15:30.309 Because some Republican board members wanted 00:15:30.309 --> 00:15:33.590 to give full support to U .S. and coalition forces 00:15:33.590 --> 00:15:36.509 operating there at the time. And the abuses we 00:15:36.509 --> 00:15:39.590 are talking about are horrific. Murray reported 00:15:39.590 --> 00:15:42.190 incidents of prisoners being killed by immersion 00:15:42.190 --> 00:15:45.549 in boiling liquid. Boiling liquid. That's just 00:15:45.549 --> 00:15:48.330 horrific. Now, it is absolutely critical to state 00:15:48.330 --> 00:15:51.129 here that Freedom House vehemently denied this. 00:15:51.350 --> 00:15:53.029 Yes, absolutely. Jennifer Windsor, the executive 00:15:53.029 --> 00:15:55.169 director at the time, called Murray's claim an 00:15:55.169 --> 00:15:58.350 inexplicable misrepresentation and insisted they 00:15:58.350 --> 00:16:01.070 had been a consistent and harsh critic of Uzbekistan. 00:16:01.090 --> 00:16:03.570 They push back hard. They did. But the fact that 00:16:03.570 --> 00:16:06.269 this allegation even exists and was made by a 00:16:06.269 --> 00:16:09.049 former ambassador highlights the perpetual cloud 00:16:09.049 --> 00:16:10.990 of suspicion that surrounds them when you combine 00:16:10.990 --> 00:16:13.830 human rights monitoring with heavy U .S. government 00:16:13.830 --> 00:16:16.559 funding. So what does this all mean? I am just 00:16:16.559 --> 00:16:18.600 marveling at the fact that a single organization 00:16:18.600 --> 00:16:21.679 has managed to draw the synchronized ire of Anon 00:16:21.679 --> 00:16:24.320 Chomsky, Ron Paul, the Chinese government, and 00:16:24.320 --> 00:16:26.820 the National Review. It is a master class and 00:16:26.820 --> 00:16:29.320 angering literally everyone. This raises an important 00:16:29.320 --> 00:16:32.539 question, doesn't it? Can any organization ever 00:16:32.539 --> 00:16:36.200 truly measure freedom objectively? when their 00:16:36.200 --> 00:16:39.019 very existence, their funding, their historical 00:16:39.019 --> 00:16:41.039 founders, their headquarters in Washington DC, 00:16:41.559 --> 00:16:45.019 is so deeply embedded in a specific geopolitical 00:16:45.019 --> 00:16:48.000 landscape. Yeah, it seems impossible. Every choice 00:16:48.000 --> 00:16:50.220 they make, from the indicators they select to 00:16:50.220 --> 00:16:52.240 the way they weigh civil liberties against political 00:16:52.240 --> 00:16:55.580 rights, is inherently a value judgment. And that 00:16:55.580 --> 00:16:57.899 brings us to why understanding the messy history 00:16:57.899 --> 00:17:00.620 of this one Washington DC nonprofit actually 00:17:00.620 --> 00:17:03.320 matters to you, because we consume the output 00:17:03.320 --> 00:17:05.819 of this organization constantly, often without 00:17:05.819 --> 00:17:08.359 even realizing it. We really do. When you read 00:17:08.359 --> 00:17:10.480 a news headline that says global freedom declines 00:17:10.480 --> 00:17:13.349 for the 15th consecutive year. or Country X dropped 00:17:13.349 --> 00:17:15.849 five points in the Freedom Index, that data is 00:17:15.849 --> 00:17:18.029 almost certainly coming from Freedom House or 00:17:18.029 --> 00:17:20.329 an organization just like it. And the media presents 00:17:20.329 --> 00:17:23.250 those numbers as absolute mathematical facts, 00:17:23.410 --> 00:17:24.910 like reading the temperature on a thermometer. 00:17:25.289 --> 00:17:28.250 But as we've seen today, those numbers are the 00:17:28.250 --> 00:17:31.839 product of deeply human decisions. They were 00:17:31.839 --> 00:17:35.119 shaped by an organization that started by broadcasting 00:17:35.119 --> 00:17:37.839 anti -Nazi radio, that fought the Cold War, that 00:17:37.839 --> 00:17:40.299 relied for decades on heavy federal funding, 00:17:40.579 --> 00:17:43.660 and that was just gutted by a 2025 executive 00:17:43.660 --> 00:17:46.039 order. Understanding this doesn't necessarily 00:17:46.039 --> 00:17:48.619 mean you have to reject the data entirely. No, 00:17:48.839 --> 00:17:51.279 not at all. Freedom House still provides incredibly 00:17:51.279 --> 00:17:54.700 detailed reports on global conditions. But knowing 00:17:54.700 --> 00:17:57.200 the history makes you a much sharper, more critical 00:17:57.200 --> 00:17:59.940 consumer of information. You start to see that 00:17:59.940 --> 00:18:02.000 freedom isn't a naturally occurring element on 00:18:02.000 --> 00:18:03.940 the periodic table that you can just measure 00:18:03.940 --> 00:18:05.960 with a ruler. It's a human construct. Exactly. 00:18:06.119 --> 00:18:07.859 It's constructed by people with perspectives 00:18:07.859 --> 00:18:10.619 and biases. Which leaves us with a final thought 00:18:10.619 --> 00:18:12.500 for you to mull over as you go about your day. 00:18:12.619 --> 00:18:15.140 We've spent this whole time dissecting how a 00:18:15.140 --> 00:18:17.720 massive organization's definition of freedom 00:18:17.720 --> 00:18:20.500 is heavily shaped by its founders, its history, 00:18:20.559 --> 00:18:23.359 and its bank accounts. So the question to ask 00:18:23.359 --> 00:18:25.619 yourself is, what does your personal metric for 00:18:25.619 --> 00:18:28.619 a free society actually look like? Yeah, if you 00:18:28.619 --> 00:18:31.720 had to build your own index tomorrow, if you 00:18:31.720 --> 00:18:33.740 were the one creating the rubric to judge the 00:18:33.740 --> 00:18:37.640 world, what invisible cultural biases would you 00:18:37.640 --> 00:18:39.700 accidentally bring to the table based on where 00:18:39.700 --> 00:18:42.759 you grew up? What would you weigh heavier? The 00:18:42.759 --> 00:18:45.099 right to vote in multiple elections or the right 00:18:45.099 --> 00:18:47.839 to affordable health care? The freedom of speech 00:18:47.839 --> 00:18:50.099 or the freedom from crime? It's a challenging 00:18:50.099 --> 00:18:51.980 thought. When we try to measure the world, we 00:18:51.980 --> 00:18:54.140 often just end up measuring ourselves. It really 00:18:54.140 --> 00:18:56.279 is. Thanks for taking this deep dive with us. 00:18:56.400 --> 00:18:57.660 Keep questioning the metrics.