TONYA MOSLEY, HOST:
This is FRESH AIR. I'm Tonya Mosley. And today, my guest is George Packer from The Atlantic. His latest story, "The Talented Mr. Vance," offers a sharp portrait of Vice President JD Vance, tracing his journey from a childhood shaped by poverty in the Appalachian Hills of Kentucky and the industrial decline of Middletown, Ohio, to the rarefied worlds of Yale Law School, Silicon Valley venture capital, and now the White House. In recent weeks, Vice President Vance has found himself in the international spotlight after he briefly met with Pope Francis the day before he died, followed by a high-profile meeting with Pope Leo at the Vatican several weeks later, where the two discussed pressing global concerns including immigration and artificial intelligence and the war in Ukraine. In his article, George Packer examines the contradictions at the heart of Vance's meteoric rise, how the thoughtful, searching voice of "Hillbilly Elegy" turned into a politician known for inflammatory rhetoric. Someone who, as Packer writes, sneers at childless cat ladies, pedles lies about pet-eating Haitian immigrants, and sticks a finger in the face of the besieged president of Ukraine. Packer covers American politics, culture and foreign affairs for The Atlantic. He's also the author of several acclaimed books, including "The Unwinding: An Inner History Of The New America," which won the National Book Award for nonfiction in 2013.
George Packer, welcome back to the show.
GEORGE PACKER: It's good to be back with you. Thank you, Tonya.
MOSLEY: Well, George, the name of this article, "The Talented Mr. Vance," is this clear play on "The Talented Mr. Ripley." And that is a story about a man who is brilliant and charming but deceitful in his quest to become someone entirely different from who he once was. And he's willing to portray nearly anyone to preserve that new identity. Is that how you see Vance?
PACKER: To some degree, it is, yeah. He's gone through some dramatic transformations, even in the way he looks and the way he talks and the way he writes, as if there's no solid core to hold him to who he really is. So Vance immediately, for me, raises a question of, who, authentically, is he? What does he believe? Have his changes been owing to some deep inner rethinking of his values and his politics? Or is he, like Mr. Ripley, someone who becomes what other people want him to be to serve his own interests? And I don't think there's a simple answer to that.
I don't think he is simply a conman. He's not. I think he's the most interesting figure in the Trump administration. He's more interesting than Trump. Vance has reflection, and that's evident on every page of "Hillbilly Elegy." He has complexity. He's capable of complex thought. And I also think he may be the future of the MAGA movement and the Republican Party.
MOSLEY: You make the point to say the problem with Vance is a question about his character. I'm just wondering, what makes the way Vance has moved over the last two decades maybe different than your average politician who kind of moves through different worlds and is different depending on the environment and the circumstance?
PACKER: Vance is actually less of a chameleon than a lot of politicians. And if you wanted to write a novel about, I would call it, the decline of the American empire, you could not do better than to create a protagonist like JD Vance because he begins in southwestern Ohio in a declining industrial town, but he has roots in Appalachia, which has also gone through tremendous impoverishment and decline. And he calls his culture hillbilly culture. And he's one of the guys who gets out.
He's really talented. He's really smart. And once he gets into high school and gets away from his abusive and addicted mother to his more caring grandmother, he thrives in high school and joins the Marine Corps. And in the Marines, he learns self-discipline and gains a sense of purpose. He does a lot of reading. He's actually not in combat. He's in public affairs in Iraq, so he's sitting on a giant air base in Anbar Province, talking to his best friend about Christopher Hitchens and Ayn Rand, and, you know, the other figures of those early 2000s who have fascinated mainly young men, I would say. But he also became disillusioned with a war that he had thought was a war of high purpose, and he came home one of many disillusioned veterans. And then he gets into Ohio State, graduates in two years. He's working incredibly hard, and he's just found this optimism because he's gotten out of this really traumatic childhood. And the energy propels him through Ohio State to Yale Law School.
MOSLEY: Right.
PACKER: And that is one of the biggest leaps. As I say in the piece, in some ways, it's a bigger leap from southwestern Ohio to Yale Law School than from a lot of foreign countries to Yale Law School.
MOSLEY: Going back to his time in the military, he went there as an idealist. What did he witness or experience during that tour, which was - it was around 2006 - that kind of shifted his perspective about war?
PACKER: Well, his friend in the Marines told me that on their way in, pass through Kuwait, where there's a major American base. And there were these guys, these officers, on their way out, who had just served a tour. I think Marine tours are basically seven months. And the guys coming out were saying, it's ridiculous. We go into a city. We clear out the insurgents. We leave, and in a few weeks, they're back. And it's just this Sisyphean task that never ends, and it never succeeds.
So there was a sense, already, before he got there that - there was a futility to the idea that we were bringing democracy and human rights to this country that didn't seem to want us and where the insurgents seemed to have a hold on the population that the Americans didn't have. I don't think he saw much of that firsthand because he was not in a combat unit. He wasn't doing either civil affairs in Iraqi towns or raids on Iraqi cities. So I think a lot of it was secondhand. But you didn't have to get too close to the fighting to realize that the American strategy was failing.
So I think he came home after his seven months quite disillusioned. He was a conservative, at that point, already. He had been a fan of the Bush administration, and so it had to have been a pretty deep disappointment, maybe even a sense of betrayal, to come home and find that this was a war Americans weren't interested in, didn't understand, that very few of us were fighting it, that most of us were simply going on with our lives. I think from there, Vance's view of America's role in the world was almost fixed, which was to say, a cynical view of any pretense to being a force for democracy around the world and, instead, maybe a skepticism that said we should just mind our own affairs and take care of our own people.
MOSLEY: You track his skepticism and also kind of a cycling through a range of belief systems around that time period and identities in his 20s, which - like many of us do, as we're trying to find ourselves. But what stands out to you the most about that evolution during that time period? What makes this more than a young man simply trying to find himself?
PACKER: He was not only trying to find himself, but he was trying to remake himself as someone who had come out of this small and, as he says in "Hillbilly Elegy," rather hopeless world to which he remained very attached. He didn't cut himself off from Middletown, Ohio, or eastern Kentucky. He stayed close to his sister, to his friends, to his grandparents, and even on and off to his very troubled mother. But he was getting away. And he says in one of his essays - and he's left quite a long written trail. He says that at that time, he lost his Christian faith and became an atheist and a libertarian. And he says those belief systems were convenient for the world he was trying to get into. They were quite acceptable in the elite world of the Ivy League. There were a lot of atheists. And if you were a conservative, to be a libertarian was sort of like being an acceptable conservative, whereas...
MOSLEY: Right. Yeah.
PACKER: ...Being maybe a social conservative was a little harder to justify.
MOSLEY: Did you find or learn from anyone you talked to any contradictions between the man that he describes himself as in "Hillbilly Elegy" and some of the realities that people responded to once that book came out?
PACKER: Well, one thing I heard from several friends of his from Yale was that they were surprised by the degree of trauma and deprivation he described in "Hillbilly Elegy." They weren't the poorest of the poor, but they were poor people who - few of whom had regular jobs. And his mother had a series of partners who cycled through, and none of them seemed to be particularly interested in her young son, JD. And his mother began to take prescription drugs and then finally heroin. So this was a tough background, and his friends in New Haven really didn't quite know how bad it had been. He didn't advertise it.
And the other thing was they said you wouldn't have known that he was in any way disadvantaged by his background. He came into Yale and was immediately popular, charismatic, intelligent. As one friend said, not having gone to Harvard or Yale as an undergraduate did not seem to make any difference in his ability to succeed.
MOSLEY: Let's take a short break. If you're just joining us, I'm talking to George Packer, staff writer at The Atlantic, about his story, "The Talented Mr. Vance." We'll continue our conversation after a short break. This is FRESH AIR.
(SOUNDBITE OF THE AMERICAN ANALOG SET SONG, "WEATHER REPORT")
MOSLEY: This is FRESH AIR. I'm speaking with journalist and author George Packer about his recent piece in The Atlantic titled "The Talented Mr. Vance." The article offers a penetrating profile of Vice President JD Vance's rise from his roots in Kentucky and Ohio, through Yale Law and Silicon Valley to his current role and the priorities as vice president of the United States.
As you mentioned, JD Vance went to Ohio State University. He went on to Yale Law School. That time at Yale was a transformative time. He arrived there and made friends very quickly, was very popular, as you stated it. He also met his wife who is now the second lady, whom he called his life coach. Can you remind us of her background and how she helped him navigate that world?
PACKER: Yeah. He called her his Yale spirit guide. Her name was Usha Chilukuri when he met her. She is the daughter of immigrants from India - from southern India - Hindu immigrants who settled in southern California and rose quickly to become very successful academics. And Usha was one of these daughters of immigrants who are just strivers, who rise, who work hard, who know what they want, who do a lot better, in some ways, than the kids who've been handed lots of advantages by generations of American citizenship. So she was already a creature of that world, the Ivy League. She had gone to Yale as an undergraduate. She got a master's degree from Cambridge in England. And so even though she was the immigrant daughter and he was the son of hundreds of years of native-born white Christian Americans, nonetheless, she was the one who became his guide about how to move in this world. Like, how do you - how...
MOSLEY: Were there really basic things that she taught him about moving through the world?
PACKER: So basic, Tonya. So basic. For example, he goes to this recruitment dinner at a fancy New Haven restaurant with these white-shoe lawyers, and he's just undone by the tableware. There's so many knives and forks and spoons. He doesn't know what they're for. He leaves the room and calls her, and she starts giving him very terse and exact instructions. Move from the outside to the inside. For the soup course, use the fat spoon. She has plans for him. She has spreadsheets and whiteboard instructions. She gets him to stop reacting with rage when he's cut off in traffic or flipped off in traffic. And at one point, she congratulated him on having successfully, quote, "course-corrected" his life.
I mean, there's, of course, a love affair, and there's a deep relationship, and they clearly fell madly in love, and that was it. They were on their way to marriage and children. But the fact that - because he came out of the Midwest and, in some ways, out of Appalachia, and she came out of this world, the Ivy League, she had to translate it for him. And that tells you something about how alien Americans have become to each other when they come from opposite sides of the education line.
MOSLEY: George, has Vance ever talked about or written about maybe the moral or emotional cost to that kind of class mobility he experienced at Yale? I mean, he basically, which millions of people do, assimilated in order to be a part of that class of people because we see what he gained - access to the people in power and elite education - but what did it require him to shed?
PACKER: That's a great question. He has written about it, and what he's written is that while he was making it, while he was getting the right interviews and the right job offers, he had this growing sense of emptiness, of what am I doing it for, as if he was working his butt off for a job and a life that meant nothing to him. And one day, when he was still at Yale, he went to hear a talk by Peter Thiel, the billionaire venture capitalist and right-wing contrarian, controversialist. And what he said to Vance and the audience was, you are working like crazy for meaningless jobs. You're competing with each other. It's cutthroat competition, and you'll find that it's all for a kind of taste of ashes in your mouth. That's my phrase, not his. And why is this happening? Well, it's happening because our society has become stagnant and decadent. And all of our supposed technological breakthroughs, like the smartphone, are actually very small. They're not revolutionary. They're not changing things. And instead, we're becoming a stagnant society with a declining working class and this intensely competitive elite class, where people are fighting for jobs that don't really mean very much to them. And all of this just hit Vance hard enough that he later wrote it was the most significant moment in his career at Yale. And I think even though it didn't change his course completely, it stuck with him.
And he later when he - and we could get to this, when he converted to Catholicism, he traced part of the motive back to this time when he began to feel that his values had become hollow ones, the values of the meritocracy, of an elite class that simply wanted professional success, and moral and other values fell by the wayside. So, yeah, it absolutely cost him. And I think the other thing it cost him, Tonya, was the sense of who he had been. Assimilation is a very painful thing. And it requires a kind of remaking of your psyche in order to be acceptable to a new class. And that - I think that's true of people from all kinds of backgrounds who are not part of a dominant group, and he was not. And so I think resentment of the group that is requiring him to assimilate was part of the psychological toll it took, and that comes into play in a big way later on.
MOSLEY: Can you explain really briefly? We know that Peter Thiel is a billionaire, but can you explain why he's so influential?
PACKER: He's just had this huge influence on some key figures in the conservative world, partly 'cause of his money, which is from PayPal and Facebook and Palantir and a lot of very shrewd investments. But also because of his thinking and writing, which is extremist, which has a very pessimistic view of latter day America as a country in decline, stagnant and overrun with immigrants and losing out to China and essentially giving into its own weaknesses and in need of some kind of jolt of dynamism from politics or from technology that will restore it to greatness. And so he's a really smart, erudite provocateur who has had a lot of influence on a lot of people, including JD Vance.
MOSLEY: Vance has a law degree from Yale. Right now, his priorities seem to be attacking the courts. What do you make of that?
PACKER: I don't think he got a whole lot out of his law degree, other than skill at networking and climbing through the meritocracy. He doesn't seem to care much about due process. He thinks of it as an expedience that can be dispensed with if it gets in the way of large-scale deportations. He seems to think of the judiciary as serving at the pleasure of the executive, and if they get in the way, well, let them enforce their decision, as he famously apocryphally quoted Andrew Jackson. So he doesn't seem to think too much of the rule of law. It seems to exist as maybe a safeguard for some people at some time. But when it gets in the way of what he wants and what his administration wants, there are higher priorities than upholding the Constitution, which he took an oath to do.
MOSLEY: How do you think that younger Vance, who wrote "Hillbilly Elegy," would think of Vice President Vance?
PACKER: I think he'd be very skeptical of him. He would think of him as maybe the kind of politician who says what he has to to get power, who uses the working class to justify his own power, and some policies that are going to hurt people? Vance is constantly invoking the working class as a justification for lying about Haitian immigrants and for cruel policies toward immigrants, etc. And I think young JD Vance would wonder if he isn't being used by this vice president, who claims to be speaking for his people.
MOSLEY: Our guest today is Atlantic staff writer George Packer. We'll be right back after a short break. I'm Tonya Mosley, and this is FRESH AIR.
(SOUNDBITE OF PSYCHOGRASS' "WEDGES")
MOSLEY: This is FRESH AIR. I'm Tonya Mosley. And today, I am speaking with journalist and author George Packer about his recent article in The Atlantic titled "The Talented Mr. Vance." The article looks at Vice President Vance's rise from his roots in Ohio and Kentucky through Yale Law and Silicon Valley to his current role as vice president of the United States. George Packer is a staff writer at The Atlantic and the author of 10 books, including "The Unwinding: An Inner History Of The New America," which won the 2013 National Book Award. Packer writes about American politics, culture and U.S. foreign policy.
Vance went on to work for Peter Thiel. And during that Silicon Valley phase, Vance has talked about being at dinners and explaining the struggles of people like him to billionaires. And has he talked about how he reconciled those encounters? Did you find signs that it actually troubled him that even among those that he admired that spoke of the ideologies that he now, like, really accepted and felt - found himself in actually also didn't really know much about him and where he was from and people like him.
PACKER: Yeah. I think it's even more acute than that because his politics at that time - and this is an important part of the story - were basically those of a moderate Republican who wanted the party to become more inclusive and more concerned with the plight of the working class and the poor but who was a conservative and, therefore, skeptical of government and of big government program. So he had a kind of nuanced, complex view of what it would take to bring more people like him out of the decline into which they'd fallen in places like his hometown.
And so when he published "Hillbilly Elegy, " which is the story of his upbringing, his childhood, his youth - and it's a remarkable book. But his role became - when "Hillbilly Elegy" came out, it became to explain his world, which was about to become the world of Trump voters, to the elites who came to the Aspen Ideas Festival and the Sun Valley conferences and who went out to dinner with CEOs and celebrities. And that was his ticket to fame. But it was a kind of tarnished ticket because what's he doing? He's telling these sort of curious but also rather smug and complacent people why his people have these pathologies. And these things stuck with Vance while he was on this circuit. And later, I think he used them and maybe even exaggerated them a little bit to justify his turning against this class that he had fought so hard to join.
MOSLEY: A thing about "Hillbilly Elegy" - I mean, I want you to delve a little bit deeper into this because you write, while that memoir really did speak to his life in really deep and profound ways in the lives of many, many people, the memoir belongs in an era that no longer exists. Can you say more about that?
PACKER: Yeah. So, Tonya, it came out in the summer of 2016. And at the beginning, like many memoirs by completely unknown writers, it went nowhere. And then, through an interview and then maybe another interview, it began to catch on with certain readers. And then on election night 2016, Vance is in a studio of Yahoo News - not the prime place to be, but he's already become kind of an informant on the world of Trump voters. And suddenly Trump is winning.
MOSLEY: An informant because he's speaking about the working class through his own experiences.
PACKER: Exactly. The interviewers assume that the people Vance grew up with are Trump voters, and that's actually a fair assumption. And so they want him. There are not that many people, at that point, who can be considered what anthropologists call native informants, people who can speak from their own authentic experience about a whole tribe. And suddenly, he's in demand because this tribe seems to have come out of nowhere to elect Donald Trump.
And that night, ABC News says, we need JD Vance to explain this. So they pull him into their main studio, and George Stephanopoulos is sort of almost is begging him to explain them. What do they want? Why are they voting for him? And Vance is sort of careful not to say too much. But - so suddenly, he is one of the most visible spokesman - not on behalf of Trump because, interestingly, he himself despised Trump at that point. He wrote in The Atlantic, my magazine, that Trump was cultural heroin...
MOSLEY: Right.
PACKER: ...This irresistibly addictive drug that would end up destroying his people, Vance's people. He thought Trump was despicable, was - you know, his moral values were wretched. And he was offering - he was a conman. He was offering a con to the people Vance had grown up with that would end up betraying them.
MOSLEY: Well, at that same time period - I mean, we're talking, like, 2016, 2017 - I want to actually play a clip of Vance speaking at the University of Chicago's Institute of Politics. This was a year after the release of his memoir, where he also then started to talk about the appeal of Trump in other ways, in more - in deeper ways. Let's listen.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
VICE PRESIDENT JD VANCE: It's very easy for somebody like me to watch the sources of news that I watch and to only see the really offensive stuff that Trump did replayed over and over again. But if you go to one of his rallies, it's maybe 5% him being really outrageous and offensive and 95% him talking about, here are all the things that are wrong in your community. Here's why they're wrong, and I'm going to bring back jobs. That was the core thesis of Trump's entire argument.
MOSLEY: So as we can hear there, that was JD Vance speaking in 2017, and he's interrogating the mainstream media. He's kind of digging at it, which will become a talking point later. But you also noted around this time, he also began to view the policy intellectuals that were around him differently. What changed during that time period for him personally as well?
PACKER: Well, I think the biggest change was that Trump won the election. And if you are a young, ambitious would-be politician, which most of the people around him assumed he would become, and you're a Republican, that's a problem. And I think that clip you played from the University of Chicago was crucial because that's very early. It's, I think, February of 2017. Trump has just become president, and Vance is now tacking a bit away from cultural heroin. And instead, he's saying, well, look, the really awful stuff that we all hate is 5% of his rallies, and the other 95% is policy. It's about jobs. It's about trade. First of all, that's a wildly wrong calculation. If you sit through a Trump rally or through a video of a Trump rally, it's a far different balance than Vance was claiming. And it's also the wrong analysis because Trump's policies were inextricable from his vitriol and hatred. When Vance said in that little clip that Trump was talking about, you know, what's wrong with your community, and I'm going to fix it, well, what is wrong with your community is them. It's those people, and we're going to get rid of them. So the hatred, the demonizing of whole groups, is absolutely inseparable from the vision Trump is offering to places like Middletown, Ohio. And I think Vance knew that. Vance is way too smart not to have known. But I think at that moment, you begin to sense a certain falseness coming in where his analysis is not as honest and not as deep as it used to be. And why is that? Well, one reason has to be that Trump is now president. And if Vance is going to have a future in politics, he might need to find a way to make his peace with that fact.
MOSLEY: Did you try to talk to Vance for this article, and did they respond?
PACKER: I tried many times. I was in touch with his press secretary, but whenever I asked for an interview, I got no response. And when I sent a list of questions that I thought he would be interested in discussing, mostly about his ideas and where they come from, I got no answer. So, to me, that was the answer. They didn't want to talk to me.
MOSLEY: Let's take a short break. If you're just joining us, I'm talking to George Packer, staff writer at The Atlantic, about his story, "The Talented Mr. Vance," about Vice President JD Vance. We'll continue our conversation after a short break. This is FRESH AIR.
(SOUNDBITE OF JULIAN LAGE GROUP & JULIAN LAGE'S "IOWA TAKEN")
MOSLEY: This is FRESH AIR. I'm speaking with journalist and author George Packer about his recent piece in The Atlantic titled "The Talented Mr. Vance."
Let's talk a little bit about Vance's conversion to Catholicism. This came around the same time as this pivot towards what I guess some might call kind of, like, a political aggression around 2019, 2020. And, of course, we don't know someone's heart. I certainly would never question someone's faith, but his conversion, from your view, was it more spiritual, more intellectual, more strategic?
PACKER: He wrote an essay about his conversion that was published around Easter 2020 in a Catholic journal called The Lamp. It's quite an interesting essay, and it's all three of the things you said, Tonya. It's - it is spiritual. There are moments where he opens St. Augustine's "City Of God" to a passage that stirs him and speaks to him. It's also political. The piece is called "How I Joined The Resistance." Now, why would it be called that? Maybe he didn't have control over the headline. But to me, that means I'm not just converting to Catholicism, I'm converting to conservative Catholicism, which is at the moment, a rising intellectual movement in revolt against classical liberalism, against the ideas of the enlightenment, against the idea of the autonomous individual with rights and freedoms as the key focus of politics. And instead, he's saying, I am embracing a different Christianity, a different Catholicism, that is communal.
And he cites Tolkien. All of these guys love "The Lord Of The Rings." He cites C. S. Lewis. And it's a kind of post liberal Christianity that lots of other famous and leading conservative politicians and intellectuals seem to be moving to at the same time. So there's a political implication. And strategically, well, what happens around that time? That's 2019, 2020. That's the moment when, publicly, Vance begins to say, essentially, Trump is right and I was wrong about Trump. He doesn't go quite that far in his public speeches at that moment. He doesn't have to. But he gives a series of speeches in which he says, let's get past this Republican libertarianism, tax cuts, deregulation. That's not helping my people. Free trade. That's not what working-class America needs. The real problem is the family and immigration. And what we need is a politics that supports families and that supports native-born Americans, not all these newcomers coming into the country. And he even begins to soften on tariffs, which he had been against before. And suddenly, all the policy items of MAGA, of the Trump agenda.
MOSLEY: You know, up until he entered politics and very specifically until he became vice president, he was a very eloquent speaker, the ability to speak in a way where people from different backgrounds and political ideologies could actually maybe hear some of what he was talking about. But since then, I mean, he has really said some very inflammatory things. There's this Fox interview, where his wife spoke in defense of him calling Democratic leaders childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices they've made. He actually points out that he believes that they don't have a stake in the country's future because of their lack of having biological children. And I want to play a clip of Usha Vance making a statement about this on Fox in August of 2024. Let's listen.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
USHA VANCE: The reality is, he made a quip in service of making a point that he wanted to make that was substantive, and it had actual meaning. And I just wish sometimes that people would talk about those things and that we would spend a lot less time just sort of going through this three-word phrase or that three-word phrase because what he was really saying is that it can be really hard to be a parent in this country. And sometimes our policies are designed in a way that make it even harder. And we should be asking ourselves, why is that true? What is it about our leadership and the way that they think about the world that makes it so hard sometimes for parents? And that's the conversation that I really think that we should have, and I understand why he was saying that.
MOSLEY: That was JD Vance's wife, Usha Vance, on Fox in 2024, speaking about her husband's statements about childless cat ladies. George, how do you assess her role here? She's navigating and mitigating his words, the controversies around the things that he said. How do you assess that?
PACKER: Yeah, I watched that interview. It's just utter nonsense. It is so false. And all you have to do is go back to the clip where Vance said it, which was to Tucker Carlson, and to a speech he gave before that where he certainly mocked Democrats in the media and in politics for being childless and therefore having no stake in the future of the country. That was his point, that if you don't have children, why would you care about the future? And therefore, why should the country give you any power either as a politician or as a journalist to determine the future? That's the point he was making. It had nothing to do with the difficulty of being a parent in America.
And so Usha Vance, nice try. She was pretty good. She was showing that she's learned how to twist the truth on TV in service of her husband's political ambitions. But it just - it doesn't pass the laugh test because Vance had begun, as you suggest, to sound a very different note as soon as he was running for Senate in 2021. Suddenly, there's this kind of snarling, aggressive, mocking, taunting tone that we have not heard from him. It's as if he's emerged after a kind of four-year hibernation cocooning conversion period as this rather harsh and taunting politician or would-be politician, not the guy who wrote "Hillbilly Elegy" or spoke so eloquently about the book and about his own upbringing. And so you have to ask yourself, where did he come from? Who is that?
MOSLEY: Some of the people that you talked to for this piece, who are friends with Vance, said that they still believe that he is motivated by his loyalty to the working class. But you show how many of his actions - repeating election lies, mocking marginalized groups - really contradict that. Who and what do you think he's actually loyal to?
PACKER: Yeah, I think at the moment, he's loyal to Donald Trump above all. And because he had all these sins to atone for - cultural heroin, even privately comparing him to Hitler at one point in 2016 - that's a lot of no-nos that you have to try to atone for. He will not allow any daylight between him and Trump. And he makes a point whenever he opens his mouth to say, well, as the president said. Well, I'm going to praise my boss here. Of course, vice presidents do that. That's part of their job. But Vance is doing it with a kind of assiduousness, a kind of energetic focus that suggests that he's still slightly on probation with MAGA, although he's become extremely popular.
MOSLEY: George Packer, thank you so much for this article and for this conversation.
PACKER: I really enjoyed it. Thank you, Tonya.
MOSLEY: George Packer is a staff writer at The Atlantic. Coming up, TV critic David Bianculli reviews a new HBO movie from the creator of "Succession." This is FRESH AIR.
(SOUNDBITE OF ROBBEN FORD AND BILL EVANS' "PIXIES") Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
