of explaining, i cannot think behavior of people or whole nations and using these very comprehensive plans. i want to start by asking, where do you think the global economy finds itself at this very point i want on. so in terms of strong weak what i think i'd like to use in a school mazda, i'll give it a grade. i give it a see, great. and of course, to understand the global economy, it consists of pieces. and so i, i don't think that that being is 3 pieces of significance right now. the 1st of course, is the united states as your up and then at a school the rest of the world uh, in the united states were having a macro economic go see it and i'll stop marketing on cash and so on. but there's a lot of discontent on the ground and i would say to people that boom is very much a financial bill. and so things can and i suddenly was finance.

i might say, i guess as a something that's so stupid, but it may be insightful. the longer it goes on, the closer we are to begin with your, of the economies. we is quite clear that they are either in recession or on the edge of recession. and in the rest of the world, the economy is stagnant. and in the background, there's a good possibility of some sort of financial problems, financial crisis from the accumulated debt put that together. and the best that you can say is. and so she, great, i mentioned in the introduction that the you are the founder on the economics for democratic and open societies projects. and there is very terms, democratic and open society is a very hard to define because um, you know, america for example considers itself as, as the modal democracy. but the, the, the current choice for president. so you have this here is quite narrow. and so i

would say disappointing. so it like being the quality of that open society is quite debatable. what do you put into those terms? what does it mean to have a democracy or to have an open society in this day and age? the to open society comes from the philosopher called papa. and it is sort of comfortable, but this deal is on such as people think that the truth is accessible, that there is a truth out there and we can get a ballpark showed that even in science, that is not possible. and it's really a very clear why we just don't know what's going to happen tomorrow. i mean we, we, but it's the size, the rise. but we have to admit that we copy something because we don't know the future. so it is possible, it is to see level and i thought one day probably the song world rise. but what's true insurance is even more true in social science and what we know about societies . so if we con no the troops, we must always keep an open mind to the possibility that we are wrong. and we need

institutional interstate govern us and arrange social life in that way. and that's why, of what's happened to the poor. listen. it's not because blurs and such a great thing in itself, but it's the only way that we have to have dealing with this very fundamental problem. and that's what i mean by organs aside. well, it's interest rate. it's something else going well. uh, i was going to continue on because i'm interested is obviously in the eye of the beholder and we in rush, i even have 2 words for the concept of truth. one is something that is internal and not accessible to your human sense. and the other one that is very personal, but in my society at least, there is such a concept as justice as they are. and this, and this is something that also in the beholder. and yet there are some social dimensions that could be sort of worked towards and achieved when he imagined that the american economy is now that it's boom. do you think um this boom is

democratically distribute at one person's ok. is another button to match for the social life, but these are, i think those things, and that's why we have to sort of socially negotiate them. and that's part of, i'll pull it up what, what a good political system does. is it twice and negotiates them in a way that delivers or big are all joined together? same roughly reasonable for our outcomes in the united states. clearly not. there's a tremendous in a quality. and there's a lot of on the happiness, as i said on the ground, because the people struggled to make it. and that's, by the way, honest because of all political problems. and by the way, it's actually very much why i started this economics for democratic and open societies project because i used to work with the labor union ship. and i also worked for a while with georgia national. i knew i was not such a popular stay there anymore and russian on. but the idea of was say, if you want to society, you have to ask yourself,

what is the economic basis that will support it? by the way, that's what george soros you never did. and that's why i believe his project is ultimately failed. it never engaged this question. what is the economic system that will support democracy? what is the economic system that will support open society? and this is a question that smashed to be on the table, and we in the united states and europe has failed. all the countries are trying to answer it in different ways and i understand what the, why they're doing it. they come from a different to that is a place to start that. well, let, let's talk about that because i think that question is at the very correct some jo, politics today. the bottom administration often uses this theme of the as the central side of democracy is against a talker says, and obviously that includes russia in the list of a talk where says, but uh, i know from my personal experience covering many international meetings that the standards, primarily use for domestic consumption internationally been democracy is like india,

brazil, south africa. they couldn't be bothered about other countries, political or ideological organization. they're mostly concerned about mutual trade about crime, about trans, border issues. you know, pretty maddox matters. why do you think this a theme of democracy is so prominent or danger to democracy so prominent in the united states? why is it outwardly rather than inwardly focused on who is a danger to who are here a very good life so much to i. yes i, i agree, but the today in the united states all foreign policy establishment, all national security establishment is a weapon audition to proceed. i don't believe we have any interest in promoting democracy. i don't even know what democracy is doing today. the that's, that's good. that's what i, i think i think we have

a rough idea of what democracy is. good more and more people realize that it's not working here. but let's stay with the point that this is a very important point of view. as to here is how we have westernized democracy as a way of attacking other countries. it becomes a cloak where our own regression, it becomes a way of flushing other countries on the back foot and effect our rec, what shows that we're not really that much into democracy, that we have about little low strip interfering in other countries when they produce democratic outcomes we don't like to have a long history of collaborating with and i'm democratic countries and we have a very flawed understanding democracy, how democracy is deter, already caught, be the uh, the evidence of for a country that says it's in favor of democracy. we have, we're up to do here. we should stop trying to end up being in there 1000 all those internal affairs at the office. i wanna ask you um,

the question that the just popped into my mind. i, i'm citing psychology and both collective around individual psychology and whenever you all started doing psychological work or any developmental work, you're start where you are and it's not a linear progress. but essentially you're sol wallace. you will even move to the next. then there are some regression always with what is important is to treat yourself with patients with empathy to invest in your development, then to treat yourself seriously. where does this idea that societies can somehow arise a democracy over all of a sudden that they can be indoctrinated into democracy? come from because i simply don't understand how such a cult, complicated and complex organism as a, as a car, as a country could become a democracy over night. they, when they for institutions are brought there. but i think that again, that is really of the essence here. and that's why i talked about the united states

weapon rising democracy. we know that democracy is very hard to come back to a very long historical process. each country has its own historical conditions. some have been more advantaged and more fortunate than others. perhaps the joker reasons of geographies. perhaps variations of west scientific revolution landed earlier or not, but the actual regions of culture. but so we know that you cannot just a lot democracy over not this in that way. that the united states is what the nice and democracy i would say the but i go section countries go ahead of the game a little bit and they were advantage. but now they've turned it around where other countries are trying to find ways of improving living standards for their citizens . a strengthening back of an inch improving the state of, of task, united states as if you know that democracy, your enemy, and then the company. it was the very common or was this terrible story that's

through the washington same tax. yeah. as they should have access to more talk research. and this is part of that. there's like an autocratic alliance around the world. ended simply in denver, pushing, understood by what, how they drum up, the impression supports nationalism. i don't know, i have support for the military support for these before and was it the intervention? of course, it's could be false if i be of interest as the exact opposite. look at the history of who has been involved in was over the last 20 years, which the us look something like the defense budgets. the united states defense budget is 10, is as large as the next 10 countries. we'll add it together right now. and i hope it doesn't last is that the united states is leading aggression against these other countries. so i don't know how to get that. but if people aren't willing to look at the evidence, and if people are willing to consider the other paul proposition,

then we will just be led by the nose, which is what's happening right now and all politics. and which is particularly the case in europe right now. well and mr. paley, we have to take a very short break, but we'll come back to this conversation in a short while placed agent, the or the

the,

[000:00:00;00] the welcome back to wells appointments, thomas bailey, an american economist, and the founder of the economics for democratic and open societies. project mr. paley, as we have been talking before they break, it's impossible to ask for democracy. but i wonder if american policy makers understand the democracy also needs maintenance. it's impossible to keep it at a terminal without actually doing much for dissing that resonates with americans. because i think in the american society there is a lot of this and of history sort of feel. and they assume that once they arrive the democracy, nothing has to be done and it will be there forever. it can be taken for granted. i

think you're too nice to say that they've been to the times at the end of history. they're not that intellectual. well, i'll lead us um, what we have is capture, i mean, we have for what democracy and actually each one of the interesting, even the think i read recently in the economist magazine that does have a democracy index on the economist has quite a right wing magazine and it said that the united states was a floor democracy and, and, and which has not when there's no conversation really about in prison, i mailed us this, i'm n g o z. yeah. some sent our last people to say that we need to make changes, but there's no design. i mean, think of it, i'll send 100 senators to send or just the state so that while name was 650000 people has the same representation to senators. as california was 43000000 people. and we have a huge problem with jerry monitoring when we use computers. now draw all boundaries

so that we can really get the biggest advantage why big one group cost of them all together. they, when the sheet was an 80 percent 20 percent about the adult, the dominant body then rearranges the rest of the map. so they can win the sheets, which say 52 to 48 percent. that way you can actually control the deluxe, even if you don't have a majority representation. indeed, by the way, but i think this happened twice already our presidential election, remember george bush got fewer total votes than algo donald trump got fewer total votes than hillary clinton. and if that happened in another country, yes, what our media would be saying are, so i think what, what blind to it. yeah, we could manage this thing. we could drop competitive districts in college competition. we could talk different ways of counting voltage. so we have to be only the equipment to do it, but a bustle. the system is locked down and bo,

and by big money, the rich part of this country, and then they work through the corporations, they own the system. so we have an extremely flor democracy right now. i don't think the economist does anything black enough justice to house more. we are the beast, it has the kite in the stage says notes and i think that's, i mean, you highlighted all the challenges associated with getting to power. but i think there is also a 2nd part of how one uses the power and whether, you know, the governing structures enough to implement a substantial change in the lives of the people. because ultimately politics exist for governance and it has to do some practical work around that and on the other way around. now, um, what elaborate is at this point? are you seeing an average american pass to not only and gab hughes or her interest voiced or heard, but actually pursued by the,

by the politicians or elective leaders the in defense of spanish? yeah. let, let me just roll back of the system. the problem of capture and not being responsive to change ethics and racist authoritarian systems as you learned in russia in the, in the years. a good call in the comment. and sylvia deborah could be pretty unresponsive and could be pretty captured. so every political system needs to think about this problem. if you want to talk about the united states, well, uh, can i stop here here? and because i don't wanna it to be only about the united states because, i mean the restaurant is often referred to, isn't a talk or see, but i, i know for sure for sure that i have a lot of lovers for example. and there's something in my neighborhood just a couple of weeks ago, there was something like in my backyard i, i made a call, i wrote a complaint on, you know, a couple of hours later it was illuminated. so there are many mechanisms in russia to actually influence life on the ground. now, the if can be, are here that you know why the important has been in power for so long. but if you actually look at the, you know, the,

all 4 of the candidates for the upcoming presidential elections, we have 5 of them in the running. and some of them are pretty young and the, you know, handsome and attractive. but uh, the population, a student seems to be, uh, honestly and i'll send typically voting in favor of a certain party. now you may dislike it in the united states, but i think part of that has to do with the advocacy of governance. and this is one more question that i want to ask you, how like in focusing on labels so much whether any particular government is a democracy or, and that's a talk or see on the losing side of what it actually delivers for the people. because people don't care whether it's put in a bite and you know, what's the last name, more logical affiliation. they, they care and whether, you know, they bring something that bring something that are into their lives. but yes i, i don't want you to misinterpreting them. i was just making a general point that every political system confronts this problem. and quite clearly, russia has a political system,

some of this political competition. and there's, there's a, that's about, there's a lively politics that, i mean, that's part of the misrepresentation, nebraska and china to, in our society a 6 i have no box politics is if president, good music is a dictator. he's no, he works within a political, we don't care what's, i mean like any of the original culture of the, uh, warrant is important, but uh, what does that stand? what supports that's more it is more important than the worth itself. kind of a absolutely. and a president potentially fairly popular, he will shoot election by popular consent by want to say, well, so that again, i want to come back and talk is a good bad. i'm not an expert or an internal affairs in russia. i want to talk about every russia us relationship. i think what we, what we are doing, actually, if we were interested in democracy, that we're saying we're doing is actually a set back to democracy. because what country is attacked from the outside us?

i believe we've been engaged not a military attack, but in a slow motion board of aggression on the border states with a long term plan, i would say to zip, if i put it on the table here, maybe we'll discuss it. i would say that within the united states, but in the state department of the pentagon, there is a problem to pot drive and deconstruct prussia. just as the soviet union fell apart, the fractures where the republics. so 2 people here believe they can do the same thing with russia itself. the russians need to understand the n. i'd states as a long term, m a t, a gauge, russia, and by talking it's a bill for china. it actually encourages the retreat from democracy. this is, by the way, also what happened in this country, often 911. when we were attacked by a criminal gang, the bush administration used it, as course to roll back out democrats to really i'm not sure i would agree with their hearing because, i mean, i think i decided that the american policy is not very friendly towards either

rational china is pretty clear, but the, on the, on the other hand, i mean, you may have these as are several intentions. but as an economist, you know, you need to, you know, fortify them by actual means of achieving them. and the russians have known about that all along and they put the efforts and money into creating a military sector into a strengthening the defensive and also into making sure that the economy is self sufficient. the same goals for china. i wonder if the american leads who have this hedge and warning intentions actually do that homework to, you know, do the numbers to make sure that they can achieve those goals. whatever those goals are practically not just to inform of wishful thinking. but practically, well that, that, that, that's obviously a big debate and this is the big picture debate, but it's taking place inside. yeah. i think that there is a recalibration taking place. you may have heard of globalization being on the rocks. this is what i'm the original goal coming out of this sort of the end of

history store. it was, and it used to be cool as sort of the wall street model of globalization was still at it. states was going to become at the headquarters of world capital. well, wall street was going to be the course and then it would have judy apartments much like say, britain, today is a junior partner or a gentleman. he is a junior partner. the hope was that china and russia would come on as junior partners, and they didn't accept that with good reason. but they didn't know i, i read a recent book about it. it's called southern pre audition, by in australia. and also with the system was a sub and i was a, any pre owned by the united states below which somebody imperial polish, those shopping period, polish, nash, some foreign policy is already, but it's all subservient to the end of the imperial power. then they're all the

actual states who have no foreign policy rights at all. and then this arrest, this was sort of level speed model. and it's on a part of what the united states was going to run the world, speak spanish. and it was really to outsource shortage manufacturing and this, and they thought it was gonna work and it doesn't look and be in the united states, just recalibrating. as a result, we are trying to bring back some manufacturing, but we're recalibrating it to as a little bit of i don't see, i don't know how much we can bring back. instead we've gone on the side of aggression. so we do things like 5 blocks of trust or technology. we try to exclude others, and we try to shop a tosh. the economic develop the developers, and maybe if need be, we'll crohn. as i think roger was finding, screw ukraine and drunk some of the board estate activities to nato latrice with maybe military force. so all of the, the, the us. so the does very much aware of the problem. and if there's recalibrating a search, it's not it. but whether it will work or not,

it's another issue. i think the world has its own and thinking to do and uh, when i a times various international organizations. and since i have many countries actually choosing the past as of the own, you know, intellectual and the sometimes industrial economic autonomy because they don't no longer want to rely on anyone for a strategic decisions. and that's an interesting development. and sometimes i get a sense that um, you know, many of them uh, have this uh, not only sort of urging a sovereignty, but i also am sort of a lack of understanding why the united states is resisting the adaptive flow of history. because many of them see what's happening right now. notice the purpose will decline of that was with rather as the rising of the rest of the world on each country bringing you know, its own strength and the weaknesses to the for and that's normal. i'm and this is

a big world we all want to develop and you know how to child and develop. i sometimes wonder if all this talk about the end of history is ultimately a cover for the united states. not being able to afford itself to have this historical on long view perspective. because russia has a china has in brazil, has a many countries that have a transitional governments haven't, but it seems that the united states, as for eval, locked in the internet election campaigning rather than a real discussion of on how the country should be governed. and what are the priorities and the distribution of responsibilities between big money as a social organization and social welfare of virtual, or economy? to chris, really a last few countries that can really be anything like autonomous. i should not be an ide states is about as close as you can get to that. it's a, it's a, it's,

it's caught on to a size 350000000 people counted extra, the northwest, a lot of resources, mexico to the south with a lot of people. do the north american accommodate, canada essentially go it alone. i don't a rush. i can, i don't know that china can, china is indeed that the resources towards large population is manufacturing. and so, so the rest of the world is a lot to be doing from a to existing and then a peaceful world that promotes economic development. and that's what i was talking about this indeed for night, but, and that's why i think it's such a tragedy to shift and weld the direction that practice it in this way. i think it is the really the verizon so rushed should be seen as a blessing. this is a way that we are going to right raise living stuff which improves political life throughout the world when it be a stage because it sees itself in in it. so in imperial ends, and this is,

it runs very deep into the culture and the people, but ordinary people see it in those towns to the same crazy way that i'll own new york on policy makers do. but it's very easy then you have to add, you do a somehow exceptional that you that your or was right, but the right to do is you want if you have his imperial mind, then it's very easy to turn the rise into the rest into a 0 sum game, and when you turn it into a 0 sum game, then you're going to have, i'm talking, wow, you are exceptional or shining city on the hill, that 1000 dollar tree, you're from, i doing some basic reality checks. and then you can look at basic economic indicators of the united states to see how much or how little dog has brought to an ordinary americans over the last uh, 20 or 30 years. anyway, mr. paley, we have to leave it there. i wish i had more time with you,

but thank you very much for this se lightning discussion. thank you for inviting. i've enjoyed it. thank you. and thank you for watching hope to see her again on the world's a part of the or the, what is part of the the employee would posted. is it the defense you of us in that in the word part?

is it something deeper, more complex. might the present good? let's stop without pleases. let's go out of it was a major. it's been us to bring it to you. sure. yeah. they probably be doing it. certainly by giving the credential insurance. the final appreciate the code and because of that move. sure. so give it to christie. we'll get to the subject has of okay, so should the cases i chose coastal academy and then i just need to spell the name . she goes to the doctor on the plaza road. lemme you know what? it was, the turn your customer simply didn't into the front of the scripture. as soon as you know, this is sort of you, but you certainly successful. we want to build some of the treasures to go

additional $40.00. i'm looking for. so more from the to mind getting for when the russian forces prussia ahead of the, from the clearing minds left by rich reaching ukrainian soldiers. while the french president doubles down on the calls to send troops to his grade, it's hard to compare versity for trying to get nato allies on board. also ahead, does india say that stepping up trade with russia in defiance of western pressure? we use a dollar to discuss the prospect with this post version of india is not see any explanation from the listing board. he does not see any certificate or dictation

from the rest of the work regarding this type of drug shop or any other kind of