member or anybody else down there without being thoughtful about it and deciding what is in our national interest to be there and we can't have won both 19 years ago and say that it binds generation after generation. that is the definition of perpetual war. >> host: thank you for beating a unique voice in the movement and thank you for enlisting your brilliant wife to write the book for you -- with you and anyone that reads the book will never lose an argument to another socialist ever again. >> guest: thank you. appreciate it.

>> thanks for joining us in the studios here on c-span2 book tv. we are branding and marketing and these are a big business. let me begin with your first book. what did you learn about microsoft, starbucks? >> guest: it's great to be with you and have this time. when i was writing this it came out at the very beginning of 2000 so it's almost exactly 20-years-old. the period i was reacher researching it it was a period that a lot was changing in the corporate world and you had dispersed full-blown lifestyle

brand which is an idea that we all take for granted that these are companies that for the first time were declaring the business model wasn't to sell products but ideas, the lifestyle, sense of belonging the that they could then extend into kind of self-imposed cocoons and sell everything as long as it was branded with this logo. they were the first one to do this. they didn't ever own their factories and this was the main thing i learned when i was researching is that there was a relationship between this progressive kind of marketing that was constantly trolling the youth culture to find the most cutting-edge ideas to get them into places that never had abs before like schools and music festivals and so on but there was an inverse relationship

between that aggressive marketing and the kind of good jobs that were not offered in the economy because the way that the companies were freeing up money to spend on this much more aggressive lifestyle marketing by divesting from their factories on the idea they should be producers that all. so, they kind of paved the way in this sense because they never owned factories in the first ngplace. they were going through the web of contractors that they put against one another for who they could provide for the lowest price and this was a business model all the competitors started closing their factories and never reopening it was the key thing they never reopened their factories. we often talk about the factory moving from north america to mexico or china or vietnam but in fact it wasn't just that they were moving locations. it's that they were never owning

their factories and they didn't see themselves as producers. it is related to the de- industrialization and the precariousness of work that we sort of take for granted today. >> host: as you point out, nike in particular getting a lot of criticism from its customers. >> guest: at the time because it was sort of new. this was still an america that remembers the manufacturing model where you understood the products before buying into the oucar you are buying it was an economic anchor for that community and the idea is that people making the cars should have enough money to buy the cars so it was culturally shocking for people to discover that the companies like nike or disney were spending so much money putting out images of themselves that were progressive

and family friendly that you pull back the curtain and wait a minute in some cases it's children or people in the early 20s making these products under abusive conditions. the conditions are pretty dubious and they have suicide maps to catch people when they commit suicide as they are so desperate on the job. that is one of the toughest thing to think about they are

not getting paid for their overtime or having 2 p.m. bottles under their sewing machines. they were genuinely scandalous and movements responding to them and people in shock and outrage about this has been bold. from the ten-year anniversary where in the c original edition that came out in 2000 i have to say a little bit about this who told us that their brand meaning is thatei they were what they called the third-place and they

were using the discourse of the public sphere almost like a town square and it was interesting in the y '90s. they came along and said we are a pseudo- town square which is what facebook is doing now in the digital town square in the '90s it was starbucks and you have your pseudo- public space en is in order to capture any sense that they have to unbranded themselves carried >> host: in the tenth anniversary edition of the book you talk about president obama and one of thers questions is dd

he live up to his hope and change brand? >> guest: did he it was early in the obama years that i wrote that. well, i think there was always something a little bit the obama brand in the sense that it's hard to pin him down to the platformas and it's interesting now because where we are if you look at the democratic primary. the labor policy platform and environmental policy platform.

they help change, feeling good. and that's why i wrote about that as the first political atcampaign that used the same tools that these corporate lifestyle brands had been using to sort of base themselves in an aura of progressivism. it's complicated that it never was very specific to say whether he lived up to it or not. as a small business and maybe more factory jobs were disappointed by that and it's part of a global phenomenon.

it makes people feel excluded and more precarious and secure and that set the stage for the right-wing populism we see worldwide. >> host: you can join us on twitter at mac tv. the next two hours on end depth. seven to 88200 in the eastern and pacific time zones 728-8201 for those in the amount and

pacific time zones. you are teaching at rutgers university. how do you frame this in terms of your book, the original book and the ten-year anniversaryry edition? >> guest: and teaching one called the corporate self and it looks at the integration of the human and corporations. where the logo and and remember this was written in the late 1990s, this then completely new idea needed to become their own brand in order to succeed in

this newly precarious job environment. nobody can expect the job security. we've seen celebrities do this when i wrote that 20 years ago, it was a pretty notional idea anybody could be their own brand to pick up the money on advertisements and do the work of projecting an image of oneself that today because of social media, everybody that has computer access has the capacity to market themselves and market an idea of themselves to think about what is my brand.

i have a group of students like first of all we talked about how this even though they've grown up with this idea it is a relatively new idea the case he would have looked at if you were a man 30 years ago to say to a 15-year-old kid not only would you want to be when you grow up but what is your brand and what does it to separate your soft from the idea to have that info does that do to friendships and relationships and unpack this because they know more about social media than i do. they are teaching me all the time and then the latest phase of this is connected to the fact we are living our lives online and a sort of constant

performance of our personal brand is that the tech industry sees data as the new whale as it is often repeated as the bigger mining all the information that we are sharing. we are not getting any part of it and we are not paid for the idea that that we are providing for free so we are looking at all these questions around surveillance and surveillance capitalism, so it's interesting to see once again to see how much has changed since i wrote that now quaint book. >> host: let me frame the question with the original new deal. >> guest: sure, and i think that there's inspiration to be taken in the original new deal

and very important warnings to heed m from that era because so many people were excluded from protection under the fdr's new deal. for the works that were excluded it is also true that the united states transformed itself at a speed and scale for this compromise to the kind of speed and scale of change should we need to embrace if we are going to lower emissions in line with what the scientists are telling us. a year ago the intergovernmental panel on climate change are the foremost gathering of scientific experts who advise the government on the state of climate science and issued the report a a year ago saying we nd

to cut the global emissions in half on a mere 12 years which is now 11 years. it would require professional transformation in virtually every aspect of society, energy, transformation, agriculture, building construction and so there are not many planes in history in which you can say this is a time we saw this kind of scale of transformation. when you have americans planted victory gardens in getting 40% of their use of the garden, basil factories transformed themselves very rapidly, but the new deal is another era which is less top-down and which is why i think it is a useful historical precedent. during the new era you saw

america electrified with more than 10 million americans directly employed. we found all kinds of public infrastructures in the schools, libraries, reservoir and much of ythe public insured to go infrasucture today as part of theno new deal. another that is quite relevant thinking about the green new deal is that conservation corps probably the most popular of the new deal programs and it is a reminder that the new deal was not only responding to an economic crisis but also in ecological crisis because of the dust bowl and the crisis of the deforestation so they sent more than 2 million people mostly fromop cities to the camps in rural parts of the united states andpl that's kind of scale is

imported into the kind of thing we need to do to pull carbon out of the atmosphere. in the book you write the following quote what makes it so difficult for many of us to grasp is thato we live in a culture of perpetual present that we are shaping with our actions. >> guest: i'm trying to make visible the economic systems and the relatively new economic and social models born of the particular kind of capitalism we have had since the reagan era which has been all of the deregulation, privatization and generating the individual consumers equally think with democracy and good good life

thatch has produced an accelerad culture that offend people point to and say it's just human nature we can't deal with a crisis like climate change because we are too selfish, too individualistic, we think to short-term and it requires us to have a longer timeframe and to put the collective good ahead of something you might want just right now to satisfy the individual urge. so, there has been a lot written that has made this human nature argument about why we will never respond to this crisis. what i find when i'm talking about what we need to do in the face of the crisis i find that thege biggest obstacle that we e up against is not climate change denial or the lack of technology

or understanding of what needs to be done. it's really the sense of doom that we as human beings are incapable of doing the things that are necessary. and that's why i think it is important to draw on these historical precedents that even if they are not exactly the kind of thing we need toe do now, thy do show that there are different ways and in the lifespan of people alive today, people were able to t think longer term and were able to put the collective good ahead of their individual desires and there are indigenous people in northh america who teach their children to think seven generations into the future and seven generations into their past. what i'm trying to do i guess this problem applies the sort of appeals to human nature that we hear a lot of and saying well

actually, that is equating a particular relatively recent form of deregulated consumer capitalism with the idea of what it means to be human, and while we can't change the law of nature, we actually can change the system that we did create ourselves if they are threatening life on earth and in fact we need to do that. i'm not saying it's easy. i'm just saying it's possible. >> host: a 7-year-old son who went apple pickingng yesterday. you moved around a lot though. for those who don't know naomi klein, just bend a minute to tell your life story than we will get to phone calls. >> guest: just a minute? nlaughter] so, i was born in canada, in montréal and my parents are american. my parents were peace activists in the 1960s. my father didn't want toam go to

vietnam and he had to choose atween jail and canada and like many of his peers, he chose canada so we moved to montréal and later back to the united states for a few years when i was very young.. i was for a or 5-years-old and they decided they liked canada sbetter. yi sometimes say that we left because of the war but we stayed for the universal public healthcare. [laughter] and my mother is a documentary filmmaker now retired. she worked for the national film board of canada at the first women's film studio so she made some really for the feminist movement so i grew up with political parents. my father worked in the canadian healthcare system. he was involved in doing things like bringing midwives and the hospitals and big advocate for natural childbirth. he's a. family doctor, also retired. i wouldn't say i grew up in a

really radical -- i have friends that have really serious radical parents and were homeschooled and their parents really walk the talk. i kind of grew up between worlds with their values i suppose, but going to regular schools in the 1980s. so i felt very pulled between the culture of the 1980s which was very shiny and appealing to me and my home life where my parents would say why do you want to hang out with your friends at the mall what is there at the mall why would you ever want to do something like that? maybe that's why i wrote no logo in my 20s. >> our conversation right you have been patient. welcome to the conversation. >> nice to speak with you. my main problem with the whole thing is the amount of energy that is required.

it's impossible and the technologies just are not goingn to be there to this pie in the sky type of thinking. we need fossil fuels. there is no doubt about it for the foreseeable future. the other thing was just the environment itself. how do you explain the little ice age 10,000 years -- >> host: thinks we will get a response. >> guest: can i answer? [laughter] thanks for the question. so i'm going to urge you to look up the work of mark jacobson at stanford university. he's he is a professor of enging who's got a big team doing a really specific research about how effective is it with the existing technology to get to 100% renewable energy, very rapidly for electricity first and transportation afterwards in

line with what scientists are telling us we need to do. there've been huge breakthroughs in battery storage and price breakthroughs as well in the concept of renewable energy so i would disagree. i think it is possible to do. like i said, i'm not saying that it's easy, but i think the barriers are much more political than they are technological and that is concisely with a panel on climate change said when they set the target of halving the global emissions in 12 years in a faithful report. and i want to stress that drew on 6,000 sources and peer reviewed scienc science so it'st just what a one-off paper. ike a one-off paper. it was co-authored by almost 100 authors and reviewers. so, it is a state-of-the-art ncscience. they said we can meet these targets with existing technolo technology. the very air is political. and in terms of the reason for the little ice age and i think

heere were a few factors. one is there is a high altitude volcano and this is why sometimes you have in my opinion quite frightening gao engineers talking about how one way we can deal with climate disruption is by imitating a high altitude volcano by spraying sulfur into the upper atmosphere and reflecting more of the sun's rays away from earth. so, that is one of the main reasons behind the little ice age and another reason that i do talk about this in the bucket for this followed the genocide against indigenous people in the americas and there's been some new science looks at how this huge loss of life of many millions of people in the americas led to the reeducation and that i was part of it as

well. norwalk connecticut, steve, go ahead please. >> if you could turn the volume down and go ahead with your questions. >> good morning, naomi. can you heare me? >> yes, they sure can. >> guest: i can. >> caller: okay, good. first, let's eliminate batteries. to make electric power to go into a battery, using fossil fuel you don't eliminate one molecule of co2. so i can't believe you wouldn't know that. but you evidently don't know that. i cannot believe that all these senators running p for president never mentioned hydrogen fuel cells which have been to be the only remedy to eliminate the co2

because there is no co2 when you use hydrogen fuel cells, period. it's that simple. so, i've sent a few messages on your facebook numerous times. i don't know if you've actually read this or just dismiss it or what you do, but anyway,y, you never mentioned hydrogen fuel cells. none of the candidates mentioned hydrogen fuel cells. it's the only remedy. i am going to have t a meeting with jeffries soon i hope to discuss this and the title of my book is reparations because what i'm suggesting is that a bear with me to be over a million people necessary to do the work to completely change from fossil

fuel electric power to hydrogen fuel cell electric power. >> host: we will get a response. thank you for the question and comment. >> i think the reason why he isn't getting a response from any of the candidates isn't that the ideas are not being taken it is absolutely true that renewable power with battery power does radically reduce emissions which is not to say that there are not environmental costs to any technology including the local environment of the impact of mining for the rare metals for solar power and wind power which is why in the book i talk about the fact that we can't think of this as simply flipping a switch from fossil fuels to renewables and everything else is saying the same. we do have a real problem of

overconsumption particularly with a sort of disposable mindset in the wealthy world and there is going to have to be a -- we are going to have to look at what was said at the united nations the fairytale infinite growth, so we are and i say we, i am talking about the 20% wealthiest people on the planet who are responsible for 70% of the emissions. we are going to have to consume less. it doesn't mean that we are going to live in misery at the level of the average european according to kevin anderson who is generally recognized as one of the world's leading emission reduction experts, and this is why in the context of the green new deal it is so important to be looking at the areas where we can afford to expand like healthcare, childcare, the card, areas that are already low carbon and can be made even more low carbon so there are going to

have to be some lifestyle changes for people who are over consuming but that doesn't mean that it's all contraction. >> host: i want to follow up to that. a 16-year-old from sweden, why do you think that her voice out of so many has designated? >> i think that it's a complicated question to be honest with you. i think that there are many voices as well who should be resonating and who have been trying to get the world's attention for a very long time. you know, i've been going to the un climate summit for about a decade now, and there is an incredibly powerful voices coming from the marshall islands. there was an incredible speech made at the united nations in 2014 with a woman from the marshall islands, a young woman named kathy who wrote a poem to her nine -month-old baby and she read it to the assembled country

representatives and it was an incredible speech that should have gone as viable as any of her speeches. so i think i point this out there have been other moments like a few years later when a tyson hit the philippines at the very moment that there was a un summit happening on climate change and the representative from the philippines didn't know whether his family was safe or not and he broke down crying in front of the entire assembly. anthat should have gone as viral as any of the speeches. so to be perfectly honest with you, i think that thereir is an issue around the fact that she is a white girl from sweden who that's part of why her voice voh and others that are on the frontline of this crisis who are living it and for whom it feels x. essential as it does to her

have been ignored. i also think that she's absolutely remarkable. i have so much respect for her. i think she is a. prophetic voie and these other voices have spoken abouthe before like kathy as well and i can point to many others. remarkable and they thinthink there is something abt her that is so clearly not that she's performing for anyone. she isn't looking for anyone to like her. coming back to maybe what we were talking earlier. we live in a cloture where everyone is sort of constantly performing a version of themselves. everybody is interested in being famous and in promoting themselves. interested. be less i can tell you i know her. she is 100% focused on the science and she talks about having been diagnosed with us

burgers, she said i'm not interested in your social games as somebody on the autism spectrum, and so i think that there'there is something about w uninterested she is in our opinion of her that makes her a very trusted messenger for a lot of people. obviously she faces a lot of attacks and is very clear minded about why she is being attacked by the likes of donald trump and vladimir putin and not to mention armies of trolls. it's because she's part of building a global movement that isis growing with exponential l eed. there were 7 million people who participated in the world climate strikes over an eight-day period. that is unprecedented in the history of's the planet. so, she's part of an amazing movement and would be the first person to say it's not about me. it's about a movement of young people coming together. >> host: the figure back to the earlier point. using fossil fuels are not the sole driver of climate change.

they are the biggest. you also write an incremental approach will not work and my question is can we afford the green new deal with a price tag into the billions of dollars? >> guest: it isn'dollars? >> guest: it isn't just fossil fuels, it's also agriculture another major driver. so, can we afford it? there've been studies about what it would actually cost to stay on the road we are on and not try to avert catastrophic levels of performing. the road we are on the leads to warming of about 4 degrees celsius. if we continue with business as usual, and that means just doing what we are doing now which is nothing and making the problem worse, and that is exactly what donald trump has been doing and brazil is committed to doing. w that leads to somewhere between four to 6 degrees. that isn't compatible with anything you would describe as organized civilization.

it would threaten every single coastal city. cithe price tag -- >> well before the end of the century. we need to recognize that a lot of the estimates about when things are going to start to get really, really serious have underestimated the speed with which things started to unravel. we were not expecting to boost the arctic as rapidly as we are losing it. let's remember that we just september was the hottest september on record. july was the hottest month ever recorded. june was the hottest june ever recorded. it's happening really, really fast. and so, you ask over with tying period. there are different estimates. i would say in the tying period alive on the planet we would be seeing absolutely catastrophic levels of warming under the business of the usual model. and there actually isn't -- like when you start crossing out what it would mean to lose new york city or shanghai, there

is not enough money on the planet to cost that out. so, i can make an argument to you that it is a bargain to invest in the green new deal which is yes, expensive but compared to what we would tape later it ipaylater it is much c. there is also something that is a morally reprehensible about making just a financial argument because we are talking about hundreds of millions of lives here that would be lost if we do not embrace the speed of change that is required in depth change that is required so yes it is expensive. and it's also in my view a moral imperative and doing nothing is aeven more. >> host: poll from louisville kentucky you were next. go ahead with naomi klein. >> caller: good afternoon. my question is about the closure energy. anybody that looks at replacing

fossil fuel, the majority of them, realizes the only possible way to do it would be to go with the generation three or four which has never killed a person on earth. >> guest: where are they, where are these generation three and four nuclear plants? >> caller: i think they are kind of developmental -- >> guest: they are not out there is the point. it's a notional technology and that's why it hasn't killed anyone. p >> guest: >> caller: we have a lot of them running now. >> guest: often envies discussions, a future form of nuclear is held up both what is being proposed is the same old nuclear technology that does have high risks.e i think that i'm going to refer

people once again to the research that is very clear about the fact that we can do this with renewable energy and there are many benefits of doing that with renewables over nuclear including the fact nuclear is a lot more expensive. it is prone to capitalism and corruption. we have seen this again and again. and what is great about renewable energy is that it lends itself to a decentralized form of ownership so rather than having the few monopolistic players as we do today, whether they are in fossil fuel or nuclear we have an amazing opportunity to have a much more democratically controlled energy grid which is built around the fact the air and the sun is everywhere so we can have micro grids and community controlled energy and energy cooperatives and the revenues can stay in

communities to pay for other services and we can kill two birds with one stone where we have a fair economy and more resources as well as geiving ourselves to zero emissions. >> who are the disaster tscapitalists? >> guest: in that book i make an argument that we have seen in the aftermath of economic shocks and large natural disasters a certain theory of political change which i call the shock doctrine is in the sense of panic in the public that

necessarily follows the war to push through policies he wouldn't be able to push through under normal circumstances because people are focused on their daily emergencies and we are also seeing a sort of infrastructure of people moving rein who want to make quick cash so the battle for pure -- paradise the aftermath of hurricane maria before it even made landfall we were hearing talk of how this was a great opportunity to privatize the energy grid and it was already the site of an economic crisis which was being used to impose all kinds of regulation. so puerto rico had already become a tax haven and this was a way that it was used during

that crisis before hurricane maria hit to attract the high net worth individuals come to puerto rico, change your mailing address you don't have to spend the whole year here. it was attractive to the financial sector and in the crypto currency sector because they didn't have to pay all kinds of taxes they would have had to pay on the mainland for the disaster capitalists in the battle for paradise, a lot of them are these entrepreneurs the thlocated in the aftermath to take advantage of cheap real estate and the fact that the crypto currency gaming wouldn't be taxed when they converted to regular currency if they did so. >> host: explain what is a communal recovery. >> guest: this has been a question i'vthequestion i've bef since i wrote the shock doctrine which is a strategy we see again and again by wealthy players in

the aftermath of disasters. i begin with hurricane katrina which is when i first started writing about climate change a decade and a half ago. when i was in new orleans, it was still partially underwater but there were already real estate speculators talking about what an opportunity it was to get rid of public housing projects and build condominiums and a lot of that happened in the aftermath. it was used by educational on-chip endorser wanted to pange schools and pretty soon new orleans had a charter heavy school system in the united stateunitedstates so this raised a lot of local activists in new orleans what is the alternative to the disaster capitalism. how can the community's response to the crisis in so many cases points to the need for the solution to the fourth their

vision for how the community should be rebuilt in the face of the disasters that will make us less disaster prone so that's what i mean by collective response to disasters and we've seen that in puerto rico quite powerfully where that little book the battle for paradise all of the royalties go to a coalition of groups in puerto rico came together in the aftermath of hurricane maria and anit's called the people's platform for how puerto rico should actually be rebuilt and respond to its vulnerability to climate disruption. .. s

>> in this very moment being sold off to developers and other private interest. like we talked about they want decentralized renewable energy by community soli there's varios proposals for that. that's the kind of thing i mean and on the large-scale a new deal. which is a way of responding to our collective climate crisis in a way that battles systemic inequalities on every front. wa let's go to edward in new jersey, you are next on c-span2. >> very well. since you discovered what i was going to talk about i just wanted to say in advocate for thee future and the disconnect about social energy that goes into invading iraq on one teeny

little picture and being scared of all the stupid things, how do we cut through the corporate noise about the things they're telling us we should be afraid of when it's a one in 50000 chance that you could be killed by a terrorist and yet we can't be scared of biodiversity or anything that you are covering. and thank you for your work. >> thank you. >> it is a great way of puttingi it. it seems possible to harnessed huge amounts of public wealth to wage a war and as that color mentioned ready dubious evidence that was later disproven and yet were demanding more from a report with sources with articles is seen as not good enough for us and were still waiting for the evidence to come in. and it has to do with who the climate crisis threatens. the fact that this is -- if we

were to take the science seriously, whether biodiversity or climate disruption and certainly interrelated. it would mean a lot of wealthy people in the global economy would have to make some very serious sacrifices which is why they want to change the subject to it all been about whetherif r not you will be able to eat hamburgers or not. this is about the fact that exxonmobil is very threatened, shallow oil is very threatened, cargo is threatened, these are the most powerful businesses in the global economy and on the continued extraction and exploitation of fossil fuel and there are other ways of organizing a business but they're not as profitable. it's not as profitable to have a solar business than oil and gas business. so we have had deliberate misinformation on the airwaves

and in print we had the fossil fuel companies funding the disinformation campaign that i would argue we've heard evidence of on the show. and it has slowed us down. we've lost wonders we will never get back because oft it. and now we are in a moment where regular people are declaring an emergency from below. that is what were seen with the claimant strikes and that greta started with her loan act in front of the swedish parliament just a little bit more than a year ago. at this point, she was 15 years old and learned about climate change at school, watched a lot of naked under nature documentaries and learned about diameters to the law, all of these crises and looked around

and by her own telling, the world did not make sense preach she said if this were true when everybody talk about all the time. if we were destabilizing our one and only home when all of our politician be focused on this all the time. would it be the front page everyday and everywhere she looked people were talking about anything else. and i think that's pretty much true even though we have a little bit of improvement in the climate coverage. she decided to declare her own emergency. as a student, the one thing she had power over, the one thing she was able to disrupt business as usual is to not do the one thing that every kid is expected to do, so she stopped going to school. she stopped going is goned friy and more people came and people in different cities including new york city started having their own claimant strikes and within a very short period, she started in august last year by september of this year, just a little bit more than a year there were seven ilhan people

participated. this is people saying we will not wait for politicians to say this is an emergency we will declare and put pressure on politicians to follow. in some national governments have declared a state of aremergency whether they are following that up with the policies that that would demand, we will see. i think it's click enter completely redrawney the map in the scale of change that is debated within the democratic party. it is nothing like what we were talking about a few years ago when there waswi a debate about cap and trade versus a carbon tax. we are talking about who is spending -- how many trillions of dollars on their green new deal plan. and how many jobs can be created and how quickly we can move and

whose targets are more ambitious. this is not just because these politicians have seen the light, it's because there's a social movement that is putting pressure on the politicians to up their game. >> it was very animated in september. how do you approach writing about, what is the naomi klein style? >> they were seven years between my first three books, and each of those books i could think of a thesis even though i did not get a phd. i was lucky enough with my first book in the fact that it sold the way it did. and it put me in a privileged position where i was able to get an advanced and walk off several years to do research and to put together research team and to build barriers around everything else in my life because i get

speaking requests and things like that. so i hauled up in the woods in british columbia where my family lives, not a bad place to haul it. it's a very beautiful place. but it was quite isolated. the place knows that you cannot get to without taking a very and driving for an hour and it's quite isolated. and it makes it easy to say no to things when people ask you to come out and do things. so usually spent three years on the research into on the writing. and when i'm writing a book it's kind of all that i do. i turn off the internet and i use those because i easily distracted. before there were apps like that i put parental controls on my computer so anytime i tried to

go online for more than one hour i was allowed a day i'd be confronted with a teddy bear and taint all of his writing the book. that's how i read books. >> your next book is what? >> i don't know. this process that i'm describing does require to write a book with 70 pages, it does require removing oneself for a few years and this is not a moment where i feel like i can remove myself from the political debate and i think these are such fateful years and we are particularly leading up to the election that i'm not going to be pushed away, i just did a book that i hope is contributing to the debate and why we need transformational climate actions and why we need y marry the struggle of

omissions and the need to build a fair economy and make the argument for why that does not slow us down but speed this up because people are hurting so much economically if we don't bring together the people will resist it. what they did with the yellow best movement. but i'm really focused on 2020 have to say and i think it is going to be a little while before i feel i hide myself away in the forest as much as i'm drawn to it. >> we will get to that in a moment. john joining us from new york. you are on with naomi klein. >> thank you. thank you very much naomi for anyour work. it is only going to get tougher isn't it. i'm actually calling -- my interest isto in nature and even

with the solar stuff and this, the other gentlemen mentioned it's not going to be enough but it's the glass -- it is really a waste of time and experience. 99% is worth it -- but the main thing i want to mention is called hidden nature and it's a startling insight of victor, it's written by alec bartholomew and he developed the inclusion and capture by the nazis and the people he works with both his craft and everything. but it's based out of the stream, when you drink out of the stream you kill it. e when the stream grows around e corner, he's on the inside and outside of the curve -- the one

side is negative and the other side is positive. in the electromagnetics in that water that keeps nutrition's and everything that would not be normally -- is not just the movement of the water it's a fact that the water is actually alive and i think there is a lot of answers in nature but you have to step back and realize, i am 73-year-old combat but, it probably took me 25 years to get ptsd which is pretty much a negative response to a reflex. >> thank you we will get a response. thank you for the question in a one of our listeners on c-span radio.

>> it is a really important observation. and i think weinre are seeing my solutions coming from paying attention to the natural world and in nature which is a paradigm shift from the kind of dominance and seeing our role to dominate the natural world and to bend it to our will. and that root force engineering behind the damning of great rivers in the fossil fuel economy that we could pick up life, barry and burnett. antenna up into the atmosphere and not worry about what happened and tell ourselves we had conquered nature. that was the whole promise of the fossil fuel age. you are no longer bossed around by no mother nature. you are the boss, if you read the marketing materials of the

first commercial scheme inches, it was all about you are now the boss, you don't have to wait for the winds to blow to sell your ship, you can sail it whenever you want. you don't have to build your factory because theysh seem to e powered by waterwheels and you can build your factories wherever you want. in the other idea you can master the winds and waves and what climate change tellsls us, maybe were not the boss after all because the carbon we emitted over these hundreds of years of the industrial age have been accumulating in the atmosphere and now comes a response, the response takes the forms of hurricane dorian over in the bahamas for 48 hours unprecedented for them to behave that way and whether it's the storms in the heat waves and

were up against forces that are far more powerful. and i think the message of this, everything in nature, every action has a reaction. fossil fuels have allowed us to tell her selves a fairytale about the idea that we now read the drivers seat and off the wheel and dominating and there would be no downside to this. so i think the beauty of renewable energy, it does put us back in dialogue with the it's aboutld and power of nature and not just bending and breaking it. >> the first time and every month we go in depth with a leading author in our guest this month was naomi klein, you can join us on twitter booktv or on facebook @booktv. >> i am on twitter at naomi a klein and i don't really do any

other social media. i sometimes stay on instagram that i'm on twitter, i have the algorithm of hate i don't need the algorithm of envy. >> let's go to tennessee. >> have you noticed there is an activist group over in the uk that was pretty empty rated, apparently they had a warehouse with signs and what have you and authorities to prevent them from doing a protest and rated them over the weekend, i'm a republican, i'm a conservative, me because this is like going into a church and taking my antiabortion signs i note happening in england but there resting them for conspiracy for public nuisance. do you ever, on that?

>> thank you for that i appreciate your nonpartisan solidarity. the group is called extinction rebellion in their fairly young group, they have not been around for that long and they engage in nonviolent civil disobedience and try to express the fact that were in a climate emergency, the group demanding more from the government to clear out climate emergency as we were talking about earlier and they have shut down bridges, roads but they are completely nonviolent group and they were planning on kicking off a new wave of civil disobedience starting on september 7. this is a wave that i agree for a peaceful assembly. >> 11 years ago the new yorker where they profiled you and set the following, naomi klein is not interested in making the left part of mainstream.

instead she wants to convince the left that it does not need the mainstream. that was 11 years ago. >> i don't know that i agreed with that then, i think my goal is to move the center and that's better. it depends on how you define the mainstream. if you describe as hypocrisy and self described. siseries opinion makers who pole the parameters of acceptable discourse. i certainly have beenac telling people that we should ignore them and we should allow herself guided by what we know is right and what is needed in the science tells us what we have to do and we need to move where the

center is in the range of policies under discussion and sorts of things that bernie sanders and elizabeth warren are putting on the table it would've been unthinkable ten years ago. so there is a transformation. i would never tell people they should not worry about the mainstream because that's where most people are. but i think of them fairly consistent with hypocrisy of what you canna can on site. >> it points out that your brother was a good activist child and you are not. is that fair? >> my brother was a young climate stricter in high school but he was focused on nuclear war he was part of the nuclear movement which my parents were a

part of any started a group in high school and he was part of the generation that would wake up in the middle the night terrified of a nuclear war and it's still terrifying and i guess for me and my family dynamics, he has definitely had good activist thing covered so i was just a more social kid and interested in my friends and having fun. it wasn't that i did not care about fairness or didn't care about politics, i didn't care about organized politics. i was very concerned withal racism, sexism, things that i perceived to be unfair. but i wasn't a joiner, i did not join groups and things like that. and it's probably why i became a

writer. >> we will leave it there. laramie and wyoming. >> you hear him argue the economic crisis and the great depression was caused by government interference in america's premarket economy. what are her thoughts about the arguments in the midst of the robert baron in the new look of business in america. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> i hope i do not offend anybody but i did not see that so i cannot recall. i'm not familiar with his work specifically but i'm familiar with the arguments that created the great crash of 1929 and it

was not the deregulation of markets is virtually everybody believes and there's a smallish group of pre-market is that the problem with the regulation. with government intervention as opposed to deregulation, i'm not convinced by that i think the breaking up ofan the banks, undr fdr was a big part of stabilizing thenc financial secr so i do not agree with that. >> no is not enough. you begin with one word on the election of donald trump. shocked. [laughter] >> yeah, yeah, no is not enough, you ask me however, rated books, no is not enough is definitely not following that pattern of taking years and years to write a book. i wrote it in over seven months after trump's selection. and i wrote it because i was

really terrified having research the ways in which shocks, in my book the shock doctrine that create a state of exception in a state of destruction where it becomes possible to get away with all kinds of things precisely because everybody is trying to get their foot in. and when trump -- that word shock was used again and again, after the election because it shocked so many of us.s. it defined all the polls, so many expectations, it came as a huge shock to such an untraditional political player. and i was really worried of the e ea as trump a bolt out of the blue that if we expected the narrative of him of an

interruption that was everything understood about america and i want to stress this is not everybody's reaction, there was african-americans, women who said i'mre not surprised, my lid experience in this country, would tell me and indicate there is a pretty big appetite for this message that trump is peddling and we were not surprised by the fact that he would. >> markets rule, money is what matters in whites batter better than the rest. >> what i was trying to do with those lines in the book -- these are some of the messages that you get explicitly or implicitly from the trump presidency and the argument that these are widespread ideas and he is a logical conclusion, a lot of trends which is not to say he is not a new iteration but we had been worshiping at the altar in

generating billionaires just because they'rest billionaires d lifting them to the status of gods, and the argument in the book with the capitalist infrastructure in the gates foundation, the global initiative that has super wealthy individuals with social problems and we can fix this without government, and the gates foundation which pivots xptes knowledge in the computer year to him being an expert on global health, reproduction, agriculture in africa. just because you're good at one thing doesn't mean you're good at everything. but we live in a culture that assumes that just becoming a billionaire you are treated as if you know everything.

in the argument i make in the book among other arguments, that created a context for somebody like donald trump who can stand before the american people and say i have no experience in government whatsoever but i'me really rich and the fact of my richness and the fact that iran this company that i claim to be successful and at least play a very successful businessman on a tv show that you all watch, that is why you should vote for me. when we cal are not very focuse. and there is a gap between events and her narrative about evthe event, if you don't have a story that explains the event in your in that state of dislocation in shock. so we can protect ourselves from

a lot of what is happening behind the shock. and there is actually a pretty clear pattern to what he has been doing on economics. no president has deregulated as much of the american economy, environmental standard as donald trump. nobody has given more to millionaires and billionaires and tax cuts than donald trump. so in the buc book i call a corporate coup and this is the story that we often miss and were so focused on what the shocking point donald trump is done. and what is the latest tweet. i think that is why he tweaked so much. it is a constant look over their strategy. he may have taken a little too far and he may pay the price for that. >> in the book you make the

point that the trump is on the top ten of the luxury brands of hotels in the world and you begin by talking about election night, donald trump in midtown manhattan both of the nominees here in new york city, your half your reaction, t where were you and what was yr reaction? >> it -- i was awarded the sydney peace prize and i was in australia for the better part of the month and i was in research and made a documentary the great barrier reef which had best experienced in massive die off in half of it is dead so it was combining the speaking i was doing withea new research and se political organizing and i would

actually get a meeting in australia with a group of organization who is interested in putting together a coalition to push for an australian green new deal with a new deal in australia and there was trade unions there and trade union leaders and eviden of bitternest activists and organizers all in this room. and we were having a forward-looking meeting about how we do this, how do we get our forward-looking agenda together and this has been my focused since i wrote the changes everything breaks in the middle of the meeting everybody phone started vibrating. because here in new york the election results were coming in in the evening but it was morning and australia when the results started coming in and ia became clear that it looked like trump was going to win in this meeting which is all about

imperative to embrace climate action just faded as everybody realized that we were in a new category. everyone went away to find bigger screens and their phones to watches in real-time. >> vancouverim washington. we go ahead. >> hi, thanks for taking my question. i read a book called plan b and it was written i lester brown was retired since then. he was talking about mobilizing a wartime mobilization to address climate change and i wonder if you read that or are familiar with his work and if so what influence does he have on the current green new deal? >> thank you. i am familiar with his work in

the literature that drawls on world war ii as a historical president that shows us that is possible to retool factories at an incredible clip and the stories are going from producing cars, fighter jets overnight anh there's also many parallels with the way the people changed, i mentioned victory garden and 20% of americans were getting their use from victory garden and americans and british people also radically change the way they moved around after world war because all the fuel needed to be conserved for the war effort andsu so leisure driving was not on, people drove very little compared to the way they were driving before. and increased by more than 80%

in public transit use. in this country more than 90% in canada and there are really important parallels and bernie sanders talks about the parallels as well, it is informing the debate and i think we are now calling the green new deal is not a new idea, it has been floating around the climate movement for a long time and the reason why i think the president of the new deal is a little bit more useful than the world war ii president is that this was top-down, and i don't want federal government to have that much power. so i think we need a model that is more decentralized it empowers governmentsth more.

but the truth iss an argument this, we actually need to look at the whole era to look for presidents of this rapid change, the new deal and the transition to the wartime mobilization in the marshall plan. as examples of times when resources were marshaled and people understood the threat various threats whether the great depression and in the case of the marshall plan the u.s. is worried that a lot of countries were falling under control of the soviet union and they wanted to rebuild western europe and away that would make socialism less appealing. and mixed economies with strong safety net, strong rights and they felt like we cannot just have deregulated capitalism, it has to be the mixed economy that has a much stronger social protection where people will go

full-blown socialist and will lose all to the associates. >> was there a book or an author that influenced or changed your thinking on any subject? >> yeah. so many books. i don't know where tonl begin bt certainly when i was writing this changes everything, reading silent spring was really important. indigenous thinkers as we talked about and i dedicate this book on fire to a man name arthur who is an important indigenous leader in offering canada and he was former chief and a mentor of mine and wrote a couple of books and he published the important reconciliation manifesto. at the centrality of land

rights, many including siding climate change that individualist landd and knowlee is very important as we are going to rise to this challenge. the book that has the biggest impact on me recently iss a novel, the over story which are told everybody they have to read. >> because? >> it's magnificent it's a modern novel, i read a lot of fiction that helps me think about the work that i'm doing around climate and the behavior is one of the books about climate change but her most recent novel is underappreciated called i'm sheltered because she is really getting at what it means to live in a house that is falling apart. her knowledge is the physical

health but it's sort of a minister fiction of the planet itself and i would recommend that. but the over story is just magnificent in the science of forest and understanding how trees communicate with each other and live in communities is one of the most beautiful descriptions of activism that i've ever read. i don't think activists get a fair shake in our society, people who really do put the collective good ahead of their own freedom and he writes about people who feel so passionate e out protecting the forest that they engage in direct action, move into trees, live entries to keep them from being cut down. and he writes about them with a lot of respect and compassion

and is beautiful to see that. >> you mentioned your husband who played on your web act when you're writing a book. it's your editor? is he tough? does he proof your book? >> did you find a typo? [laughter] yes, e earlier on he would edite more and he -- he reads almost everything before it goes out and i added him as well. and we have collaborated and he directed a film. when i was writing this changes everything, he made a film to go with the book in a way but the projects worked in parallel, we e a experimenting to write book and then making a filma about it if you're going to make the film in which i did with the shock doctrine and there's something a little bit funny

about that because you're necessarily retracing your front steps so you don't actually have the same sense of discovery that you have a new doing research and being changed by your research. you are mimicking the sense of discovery for the camera. for me i never want to go backwards i want to go forward. so he was making films after i read the book and we had -- it was tough to fill around the shock doctrine. so we decided to do something different and i was writing the book and he was making the film and that meant we were th both busy so he had less time to edit and he had for h previous books. he's a great editor. >> cokie roberts said the biggest challenge writing a book with her husband robert. >> i believe you. , it was hard enough to make the film and book together, i'm not sure -- i definitely -- i'm not

sure i could writef a book with anyone but i cannot do it with ai husband because i value our lives too much. mike from new york your neck. >> i would l like to know where are all the people going to work in the future, it seems as lost for decades man has done away with middle-class jobs and personally i think the lack of jobs is the root of all evil. >> thank you. >> that's a great question. i think we have -- i think it's not exactly a lack of jobs, it's a lack of jobs that pay salaries that can support families, provide benefits and a sense of security there is pretty low on appointment right now. but there is an epidemic of underemployment and a lott of people are having multiple jobs.

there is a contradiction or people who support the president want to claim everything issu great economy because his low unemployment. but that does not explain why there's so much economic stress and why people are falling into poverty and why there's an epidemic of depression and addiction and clearly not everything is going well with the kind of jobs people are getting. it is clear that we invest in renewable energy and efficiency and public transportation, we create more jobs and invest in fossil fuels and there's already more jobs than renewables then there are employed in the fossil fuel sector. but, we have not made sure thate the jobs pay the same salaries that people had working at an

auto plant for exxon. these are good jobs. although there getting worse which is why we have a strike with the workers. this is in the original green resolution with ocasio-cortez, they say that workers who are moving from high carbon jobs to these new jobs and renewables and energy efficiency, need to maintain salary levels and benefit leve levels, that is really key. another part, we have a lot of jobs in the service sector care economyin the teaching or saying overwhelmingly women's work and because it's in women's work and they have not been any women callers, it is devalued in our economy so if there are women out there, i encourage you to call. i am lonely. [laughter]

>> we are going to hear from mark after this i noticed the same thing. >> hello. no offense tom. >> none taken. i have to blame my mother for that. i want to thank you for your clarity of thought and communication on the crisis over lifetime. and also i've heard you speak on youtube and other venues about crwhat is sacred and the demarcation that happens in the new age as we come more scientifically based and got away from older more religious ways of thinking, can we separate the supernatural and superstitious from the sacred and come up with a new vision of what we will see in the future. and a new life expectancy and a

clean new deal for our future and particularly her kids and grandkids. thank you very much for your time. >> what a great big question. i think the don of the tiscientific resolution in the industrial age, there was a shift in the view away from seeing the natural world as a. and i appreciate the color, using the word sacred because i don't think is just about religion or organized religion and once again it's a relatively new phenomenon to not see the natural world as sacred as a little bit scary and alive and

deserving of our respect. pretty much every other cosmology in the modern industrial age saw the natural world that way. when you do see the natural world that way you're more careful, you don't want to piss off the gods, you don't want to make too big of a mess. so i think that is draining away of the sacred and this is part of the reason why i love the over story because it's a re-enchanting of the natural world that a lot of people are drawn to, crave, understand that part of her crisis, the crisis that were in with climate change has to do with imagining the world as a machine and ourselves as engineers that made us believe we could take and take without any repercussion. so i do believe -- i've written

this before, it's not just the climate disruption and ecological crisis or an economic crisis, it really is a spiritual crisis in the narrative that were draining 16 and seeing the natural world for us to dominatn which begins. it is how we ended up where we are and it's going to be where older stories combined with newer ones will be part of getting us out of there. >> to other books in a sentence described. >> that is a collection of essays i wrote after the book came out, i was on the front line of debates about corporate globalization. >> this changes everything.

>> , the subtitle is capitalism versus climate. and it is about the clash that we have between economic system that requires expansion in order to not being crisis in the natural world that requires that we contract in order to not be in crisis. >> let's go to margaret in arkansas. >> thank you. and thank tom for his question in naomi for her reply. this morning my phone received two alerts for flash flood's in my area, i think greta is a prosthetic voice and it seems to be some religious denomination are listening and hearing and studying to know the truth and i'm unsure about my done

nomination the southern baptist. i don't really know what their opinion is now. but some off us believe -- [inaudible] and to read descriptors of nature and accurately interpret them -- >> we lost part of it but i think we got the essence and will give a response. >> thank you. i absolutely agree that we need faith leaders in this conversation it's not just about politics and economics. we need to speak to people wholesale. is not just organized religion but i have a chapter on fire that is very unlikely visit i took as a jewish feminist which

was to the vatican after pope francis released his oncology which is an incredible document i would encourage everyone to read and like i said i would not have thought i'd be recommending catholic text but it's an amazing text. it draws on the teaching of francis and being in the vatican and how i attended the conference about this where it was really profound debate that was happening in the catholic church, re-examining the idea that the earth is human dominion and it's just here for us. and really what pope francis was saying very clearly that when nature has value in itself and that was pretty radical, that is seen as pretty radical as part of the catholic church. we need the leadership from all

leaders. >> your first book came out 20 years ago. if we were to sit here 20 years from now, how do you think history will judge presidentea trump in this moment in history? >> this moment in history will depend on what we do. i think were out of crossroads. what i am worried about in this moment is not just the weather. i'm not just worried about the flash flooding that the previous color mentioned or the forest fires that have ravaged part of the continent where my family is or the historic storms that are pounding the caribbean as we speak. i'm worried about all of that. thewhat scares me most is intersection of heavy weather with the rising climate and i don't think they'r unrelated.

we are seeing figures emerge but also members of and in the philippines, even in india where the figures who are really good at defining a protected group and the defining and threatening others without group with international borders and also as we do will trump, the so-called invading armies of others. we are seeing borders, not just in the u.s., european union with thousands of people have been left to drown in the mediterranean. like i said i don't think it's a coincidence that these two fires are happening at the same time in the fire of climate disruption in the fire that is unmasked, i think people understand we ar entry ecologicl

disruption in the space for safe human habitability is contracting. people are going to have to move and there's a couple ways we can respond to that. the danger of how we will look back on this moment 20 years from now my fear will be that this will be the moment that we decided we were only going to protect ourselves, our own and that we are entering an era where people are going to be okay with seeing an unspeakable number of people died. or we go down another road and the other road is based on the idea that every human life has equal value, the everybody has a right to seek safety and thisics a crisis created in the rich world being felt in the poorest parts of the world and we knew each other a lot by right of

being human. i hope in 20 years from now what we are seeing about this moment, this is the moment that we chose not to hoardoa but to share youo figure out how to live together into live on less land but with more generosity and more humanity. i believe it is possible, i know alternativeut the is not just climate disruption. the alternative is been the type a human that i don't think weei want to be. >> if the president is reelected? >> all i know is every waking moment for me is focused, not happening. because we don't have another four years to spend working on

wilderness to drilling and building new fortresses and unleashing more hatred against the most vulnerable. i think getting rid of trump is a moralal imperative and that means making sure the candidate emerges from the democratic primary who is a trusted messenger for standing up to corporate power, a lot being in the swamp of washington. and really seen as somebody who is going to have a different moral value. i will leave it to your viewers and listeners who best meet that criteria. it's important that they be a sharp alternative and not have a lot of baggage going into this race. this is big change ahead of us.

and there are very powerful forces that are going to try to stop anybody who's advised to do the right thing. so if you look at the candidates make sure your choosing a candidate who has a very good spying and a strong appetite for taking on our figure. >> san francisco, john, your next with naomin, klein. >> it is really a pleasure to speak with you, i want to turn the conversation into my favorite subject, russia, the ukraine and the 2016 election. in the following collision with russia. and i specifically wonder where you stand on the collusion delusion part but let me just

say the revolution that happened in 2014, i see it as a classical regime change operation that was run out of the state department, john mccain, victoria, the whole gang and then on top of it you have victoria and overheard conversation where she lays out the whole leadership of who's in and who's out. that is crucial because as we talk about ukraine andse the roe that is now being talked about, you have to go back and realize thatup we supported proto- fasct elements in the ukraine that are still active and still strong. jump forward to the 2016e election young paul manafort who becomes trump's campaign manager, and the hillary campaign who is in bed with the ukrainians, joe biden et cetera.

they are basically doing maneuvers to get paul manafort indicted, which he was indicted, the indictment was pulled after truck became president. now we fast-forward to hear where we have two years of mueller and the whole idea that trump was a russian puppet while even looking over every stone they cannot prove that which just goes to show it was a bunk accusation from the beginning. -- we need to get a response from naomi klein p thank you for the question and,. >> i'm not sure that i agree there's absolutely nothing there. but i obviously, they do not make the case around russia. but what is going on with the

crane is linked to what i was talking earlier in terms of who the candidate is that runs trump campaign. i would encourage anybody who has trouble with mr. trump to go find a reasonable trump supporter and tell them the story, tell them the ukraine story in the biden story and why he should be impeached. and then tell me how you feel about biden. because i don't think you can tell the story in a way in which they both don't look back. which is not the same as saying biden has done anything illegal, he probably hasn't. and i do think that trump has committed an impeachable offense and he should be impeached and i

think he's committed other offenses that he could've been impeached for. but given that this is the one that the democrats have seemingly chosen, i think it's a huge problem for biden because even if it's not illegal, i keep reading these stories saying there's no evidence of wrongdoing, define wrong. there's no evidence of legality. but that's not the same as wrongdoing. and i think that were in the climate crisis, we were in a climate crisis during the obama years, the obama biden presidency was all about natural gas, their interest in ukraine was about increasing natural gas production. and the fact that the standing vice president son would be on the board of an energy company of any kind, natural gas company

getting $50000 a year is a fossil fuel nepotism that is not good for politics or the planet and i think we need a muchth cleaner break with this kind of -- i think -- after the 2016 election, the new york times asked me too write to respond to the claim that hillary's loss that no woman could be presiden and adjusting -- there were a lot of women who took it very personally in one of my going to tell my daughters, does this mean the united states is too misogynist to ever have a woman. and i wrote an article making the argument that i do not think that is what we should take from

the 2016 election because i feel that it was to compromise a candidate on a lot of fronts to run as hard as she needed to run. one ofhi the things in which trp was vulnerable was that he had multiple women accusing him of sexual misconduct. in her lewd curtain was not able to go after him on that because she's to compromise because of bill clinton. that was one reason among many others she lost the election. >> the point is, her hands were tied behind her back because of her own compromises. i would say one of those things that trump is most vulnerable is his own feeling and the nepotism in his own family which made not be illegal but improper and flies in the face of him claiming he is standing up for work in america and all about those workers.

. . . normal on having to deal with the various ways in which his family has profited from the presidency to ask yourself is joe biden a trusted messenger for that message and what we're learning about undermining or are his hands tied behind his back in the way hillary clinton were tied behind her back on multiple fronts, you mention trade and other funds. we need a candidate whose hands are tied behind their backs . please, don't make joe biden. i just would like to say that will go to frank from kentucky, your next . >> i'd like to get back to what they were discussing what we were discussing aboutut fdr and the new deal because i didn't think they were aware of the economic stabilization board was run by the treasure he was a congressman who helped pass the 16th amendment and a lot of what

accomplish could be used with article five. after he left the congress and the 16th amendment and became treasurer, the crash happened before fdr became president and the economic stabilization board was in response to the depression so after they got that stabilized, he went on to sit on the supreme court. they have had a long history because they are the largest neighbors and you would have to state speakers. u at was your final point?

[inaudible] i think they wil i will treat ia comment. joining from california thank gyou for waiting. go ahead.. >> caller: thank you. so, naomi mentioned that the power of corporations so i wanted to mention there is an amendment for the constitution to say corporations are not people with rights. a corporation is a useful device for organizing people and money and resources but it should be inbe the public interest firm to play aformed byan active governd corporate charter and since we have a government of the people supposedly come to corporations shoulthe corporationsshould serr than the other way around. so there is an organization called move to amend they have

privileges which can be granted by law but they do not have the same inherent rights as people. >> it's a great initiative to recommend people check it out. i was aware of it and it's a big piece of the puzzle in terms of having everything needed to change things as quickly as we need to. from north massachusetts, care in the afternoon. good afternoon. you have very mind expanding programs and guests every single day. i share your last name so that's fun but it's spelled a different way.

i'm a former poet laureate of my town and i wanted to know, i have a two-part question. i wanted to know if you ever write poetry, did poetry contribute anything to your writing in the past and how you started writing because many say they started with poetry before they went to pros. the other part is because of your canadian upbringing. i wonder if you think having your son the age of school do you have a value of canadian school education over the american education public private or charter it would like to know your opinion. i will hang up and listen on the air. >> host: can you stay on the line for a minute, are you with us? a

>> guest: i have to admit i did write some bad poetry before i started writing good. it was my first sort of writing passion but i haven't done it in many years. it fit my team years very well. i appreciate it and one of the things i talk about what the green new deal should mean is the original new deal led to the funding for the arts including for poets and playwrights and novelists and painters and muralists and so on. this is good low carb and work we need to invest in bonds is putting up solar panels. there are a lot of green jobs i would say to the previous caller.

i am living in the united states right now because i'm teaching at rutgers and we just moved a little more than a year ago so we experienced both the canadian public school system i and american public school system. i think that it tricky because i would say that i don't -- the canadian public school system is a less unequal. there are discrepancies between the kind of public school education that you get a there are differences and it follows the racialal fault lines and in schools in wealthier neighborhoods they tend to be better resourced and able to

raiseey more money and so on. but that doesn't quite as unequal as it is in the united states. i felt very disloyal saying that, but for students and parents there are stronger tools to require they provide those supports and to be honest with you, people have their views of canada and i would be happy to talk about how much better off the health care system is, but when it comes to special needs, the u.s. actually has us beat.

>> host: whether or not they influence yourur writing and thinking, go ahead. >> caller: such an honor to join you today. i'm very blessed i met you at cooper union years ago. i have a lot of ground to cover but basically i want to ask about your concept silencing in canada. the whole concept of fossil fuel that clamp down on environmental and the spirit of the unity at standing rock i'm asking you how can we call on the leaders especially in new york city, massachusetts and maine that wants to base their deals on the ethical cleansing of some of our indigenous neighbors. based on a the situation i'm

talking about the neighbors of the north and the ecosystem that has been cleansed by and how can su find a more sustainable way to offer them in all lives leave -- all to help them also lived in sustainability. >> we will get a response. thank you for that. >> guest: the fossil fuel

based economy meaning the people that have the dirty industries in their backyard, the highest cancer rate and admiration and bearing the toxic burden of the economy the resolution about the workers in the sectors maintaining their salary that huge numbers of jobs that will be estimated and building affordable green housing area to

the economy teaching that's already low carbon that there's a lot of cleanup work that needs to be done. this isn't only true in any region where you have intensive fossil fuel extension but abandoned wealth and land and rehabilitation. there's hundreds of thousandsdsf jobs that can be created just by getting those to pay for the mess that they created. the problem is they are not

getting them to finance the cleanup there's plenty of work to be done and if we had this principle those need to be first in line but as i mentioned earlier, it's part of the response to the climate crisis we know we need huge reforestation land of rehabilitation it's on the model dispossessed people of their land where we create national parks and indigenous peoples access to the land. and the indigenous leadership as a parthat part of the huge conservation work ahead. >> you get the last question from saint paul minnesota. i'm wondering in 9/11 they

stopped the airplanes from sliding out and it heated up a little bit so i'm wondering inet minnesota today the fall is coming earlier and the comment about even though it's heating up and getting through is that going to affect plans? >> guest: i wish i really understood the question. >> host: getting colder earlier. climate change has gone from being a future threat we talked about being worried about off and thinthe distance to somethit is impacting the lives of pretty much everybody now. though in some cases it's noticing the changes around the

weather like this is a strange fall. they've lost massive infrastructure or on the west coast they are blanketed in wildfire and it was razed to the ground by this historic campfire so this is not an abstract issue you or far off in urgency and we are seeing this reflected in the polls and it's a huge shift since i started writing about this. americans are now ranking the concern that the to at the top e concerns alongside of healthcare. let me go back to the final question earlier influencing the thinking or shaping the questions and how you belong in this. >> guest: low, i need young

people everywhere i go and i partnered with respect to her with the sunrise movement which is a youth climate justice movement that has been demanding a green new deal and everywhere i go i have a private meeting with them before i do my event. they are worried about everything from whether it makes sense to be going to college, they are so uncertain about the future and whether they should have kids and things like this because they are concerned about what the future might hold. i think that they are living with so much about such a sense of insecurity about the broad existential sense o of is therea future at all and we are not taking this serious and their

rights to the future and being in contact with them is what fuels me. >> host: the works including no logo, no it' is not enough. the shock doctrine and on fire. thanks for joining us on c-span2 book tv. >> it was a pleasure. it