he brings you the latest nonfiction books and authors. funding for c-span2 comes from these television companies and more including ox. ♪♪ ♪♪ next book tvs monthly in-depth program with author and professor, is books include consequences of capitalism and notes on resistance, a collection of interviews on the pandemic, the environment and economic inequality. was in 2003t

philosopher and author, linguist noam chomsky first appeared on this program in depth. we have invited him back to take your calls and talk to you one more time. since 2003, he has written dozens of books. one of those books was, " consequences of capitalism." here is professor chomsky talking about one of his more recent books. noam: a major poll just came out from two research -- major polling agencies. in which they asked people, they gave people a choice of 15 serious problems, asked them to rank them in terms of urgency. divided by republicans and democrats. among republicans, the very last one at the bottom was global

warming. at the top was illegal immigrants and the debt. debt, incidentally, became a problem last november 4. up until then, the debt was fine. republicans were creating a two enrich very rich people, so there was no problem. november 4, biden took it over and might use it to help others. poor people. it is not that the people who said that actually believe it, that is what they hear in the bubble in which they are contained. you listen to the murdoch tv station, fox news, read the murdoch press, and that is what you hear. when you are stuck in that bubble, that is what you believe. the real problems are illegal immigrants, terrible problem.

the data suddenly became a problem. at the bottom of the list is destroying the environment, in which life can be sustained. all of these are signs of the collapse of not only the arena for rational discourse, but general social collapse. the social order is collapsing. it didn't just happen by itself. it happened because of a plague that was set in motion 40 years ago, we discussed a lot of it in the book, the plague of neoliberalism. which was actually started in the 1970's, a massive business campaign to institute it. it took off with reagan and thatcher. if you look at their prescriptions, it is obvious what is going to happen. reagan's inaugural address, he

said the government is the problem, not the solution. decisions have to be taken out of the hands of government. well, they don't stop being made. where are they going to be made? in the private sector. they are going to be made by powerful corporate tyranny is, which is what corporations are. unaccountable to the public. the government, of course, has a flaw, it is partially accountable to the public and can be controlled somewhat. but private charities are free, no accountability. the second point was friedman, the -- who pronounced that corporations have one responsibility, to their owners. shareholders. period. nothing else. corporate rights are the gift from the public.

there's plenty of advantages that come from incorporating, it is a gift, but they do not have any responsibility. just to themselves. put these two things together and decisions that had to over to private tyrannies who have no responsibility other than to enrich themselves. margaret thatcher comes along and says there is no society, just individuals. somehow managing on the market that they are supposed to survive in. the first step that both reagan and thatcher took was to destroy any possible defense against this assault. their first steps, first come over to attack labor unions with illegal measures like strikebreakers. that opened to door to corporations to do the same.

the one-way way people have to defend themselves, by organizing, taken away. put all this together, you would have to be a genius to figure out what is going to happen. actually, 40 years later it was studied by the rand corporation. super respectable american corporation. they tried to estimate the transfer of wealth robbery, we should call it, the transfer of wealth from the lower 90% of the population, middle-class and working-class, to the very top, which turns out to be a fraction of 1%. their estimate was about $50 trillion during the 40 years of neoliberalism. that is a vast underestimate that includes other things which are now on the front pages. when reagan came in, he opened

the spigot for businesses to do whatever they like. tax havens had been illegal before then. and blocked by the treasury. opened it up, there's probably another tens of trillions of dollars. changed the rules on corporate management, which the government said, allowing ceos to be compensated with stock options instead of salaries. that means anything you can do to raise the stock, like buybacks, may ruin the corporation but it is good for you to get a higher income. that is the result. also, executives were permitted to pick their own board, the board that would determine their salary. what do you think is going to happen? take a look at the figures.

ceos salaries have skyrocketed. carrying all of top management along with them. extended to the public sector, university presidents, hospital -- and so on. meanwhile, the majority of the population gets by from payday to payday in a precarious existence. it is a major assault on the population. it has happened all over the world. australia, europe, not as severe as in the united states, but severe. people are hager -- people are angry, disillusioned, resentful, easy prey for demagogues of the trump variety who says, i will save you. and it will end in distress for everything. why should i believe with the centers of disease control say about the pandemic echo they are probably just -- pandemic echo

they are probably just run by crooks in washington. so, you have a breakdown of the social order. it is happening over much of the world. >> live from his home in tucson, arizona where he is america plus professor at the university of arizona, noam chomsky. professor chomsky, what issues -- what is on your mind these days? noam: well, there are lots of things going on in the world. right now, one of the major ones is, of course, the war in ukraine. there's many others. there are background issues. we are, like it or not, the human species, racing to imminent disaster. there are two huge problems.

one is the growing threat of nuclear war. which would, basically, end modern civilization as we know it. the other is the destruction of the environment. inexorable. we know it has to be done, we are not doing it. if we do not turn that corner soon, we will reach an irreversible tipping point and it will be a matter of slow moves towards catastrophe, irrevocable catastrophe. that, in addition to what is right on the front pages, the background of it. there is plenty to be on everyone's mind. >> professor chomsky, you have been active for decades on nuclear war, economic policies, social justice, what is the progress you think you have

made, or that the world has made? noam: there has been, over long periods, there has been progress. we happen to be -- we happen to have been, for the past 40 years, in a period of serious regression. but, there are ups and downs before. if you think back to what society was say, in 1960, 60 years ago, this was a society in which we literally had laws against miscegenation, which were so extreme that the nazis refused to accept them. the one drop of blood loss. -- laws.

the rights of women were still not recognized. it was not until 1975 that women had the legal right, guaranteed legal right to serve on the federal juries. that means, to be regarded as peers, as persons and not property. which they basically were in british common law that the country to go over. they were, in many respects, minimal rights were not respected. well, that has changed. that is an improvement. beginning in the late 1970's, there was a shift in the nature of the state capitalist system,

which was described in the previous comment, the move towards the neoliberal system that has been quite harsh for the general population here, and across the world. an enormous concentration of wealth and a precarious existence for many, which has led to understandable feelings of anger and resentment, distrust of authority, contempt for institutions. that can take positive forms. let's have changes for the better. there are such elements that can also take very dangerous forms. i am old enough to remember 90 years ago when there was, as

today, a very serious threat, the threat of the depression, deep depression, much worse than anything today. my extended family was first immigrated, new increments -- new immigrants, first-generation immigrants, working-class mostly. they were, and this was -- there were two ways out of the depression. one was taken by the united states. the u.s. led the way towards a social democratic revival, committed to and -- by a revived militant labor movement.

organizing, militant labor tactics, led the way to the new deal measures which pioneered postwar social democracy, an enormous lift for the population. that was one way out. the other way out was what happened in europe, which sank to the depths of fascism. those were the ways out. actually, there are residences today -- residences -- it would be utterly ironic if the united states continues to unravel and move towards a kind of proto-fascism, while europe hangs onto the -- of social democracies that have resisted the neoliberal assault. and perhaps revise these very

positive tendencies. it doesn't have to. the choice is in our hands. meanwhile, there are imminent problems. the war in ukraine is on the front page headlines. it is not the only one. literally millions of people are facing starvation in afghanistan. millions of people facing imminent starvation. people who a little bit of money can't go to the markets where there is food, to buy food for their starving children because the banks are shut. they can't get access to the money. where is the money? new york.

the u.s. refuses to release to the people of afghanistan their own money. the banks are supposed to be fiduciary institutions. you place your money in them, with the assurance that it is yours to attain when you need it. not in this case. the u.s. government has stepped in, not just in this case, but others too, to block people from getting their own money. there is a pretext for this. the pretext is, we have to assure that victims of 9/11 have a right to compensation from afghans who had nothing to do with 9/11. the rural people of afghanistan who are starving had nothing at all to do with 9/11.

in fact, those with good memories will recall that the taliban offered total surrender, which would have meant handing over to the united states the suspects in the 9/11 attack, the al qaeda suspects. remember, at the time, they were suspects. the fbi informed the press months later that they suspected them, but did not have definitive evidence. but, the taliban offered to turn them over. the u.s. reaction was, we do not do surrenders. romney. echoed by george bush. rumsfeld, i am sorry. echoed by george bush. george w. bush.

now, the afghan people have to starve to death because we hold their funds. and there are other things happening in the world. thankfully, there seems to have been an agreement for a two month reduction of fighting in yemen. the worst humanitarian disaster in the world, according to the united nations food -- united nations. the saudi government, which is the main force responsible for the disaster, along with the united arab emirates, saudi arabia had been blockading, intensifying its blockade of the only port in which food and oil can be imported into the starving country.

the official death toll last year was 370,000 people. the actual death role is unknown. again, the united nations warns that hundreds of thousands of children are facing imminent starvation. the saudi and emma rossi -- emirate air forces cannot function without u.s. equipment and u.s. intelligence. u.s. trading. we are assisted by britain, a few others, that the u.s. is in the lead. these things can be changed. the things that can be uppermost in our mind. what can we do?

what can we do about suffering, major problems in the world? whether it is existential problems the existence of the species like global warming or nuclear war, or whether it is the terrible, miserable suffering of the people of ukraine, under brutal and violent aggression by the russian army. people starving to death in afghanistan. or yemen. we can mention other things, but what can we do about all of those things? that is what we have to be asking ourselves. that is what should be on everyone's mind. >> this is your chance to talk with noam chomsky. if you have been interested in public policy for the last 50 or 60 years, chances are you have heard of professor chomsky,

perhaps even read some of his hundreds of books. the numbers are on the screen. for those of you of the east and central time zones. 8201 for the mountain and pacific time zones. you can also send a text message. please encode -- please include your first name and your city. we also have several social media ways of getting a hold of us. we will scroll through those on the screen. i want to quote professor chomsky from one of your most recent books, requiem for the american dream. you say that some of the problems of government in the u.s. today stem from an excess of democracy. why do you say that? noam: actually, i did not say that. i quoted it. the quote was from a very important study, about 40 years

ago, 50 years ago, 1975, it is the first study of the trilateral commission. the trilateral commission is an international commission of liberal internationalists. you get a rough idea of their political stances by the fact that the carter administration was drawn almost completely from within the ranks. so, that group of people in the united states, they -- their counterparts in europe and japan, liberal internationalists were the trilateral commission. they came out with a very important report called, the crisis of democracy. they were responding to the

activism of the 1960's, which considerably civilized society. and led to the developments that i mentioned briefly before. the trilateral commission warned that there is a crisis of democracy. the crisis is what you quoted, an excess of democracy. there is too much democracy. what is happening, they described during the 1960's, is that segments of the population that are supposed to be passive and obedient began to try to enter the political arena to press their own demands. these are what are often called special interests. young people, old people, working people, women, farmers,

minorities, these people are not supposed to be making noises in the political arena. there supposed to be quiet, obedient, apathetic, show up every couple of years to push a button, go home. and then go home and let their betters decide for them. what to do. well, that excess of democracy, they said, is putting too much of a burden on the state. so, we must have, what they call moderation in democracy. people should return to their passivity and obedience. they also talked about particular sectors of society, like the universities. they said the universities and

the churches are not doing their job of indoctrination of the young. their phrase, not mine. we have to do better indoctrination of the young so that they are not out there in the streets protesting the vietnam war and calling for civil rights, or women's rights, other things which are too much. so, that is the liberal internationalists. there's actually another major argument that came out at about the same time also in response to the activism of the 1960's. the powell administration. it was meant to be secret. this was a man who richard nixon appointed to the supreme court, justice powell.

powell issued a memorandum to the chamber of commerce, to the business world, and it was in a way similar to the trilateral commission report. but, much harsher. the document was intended to be confidential but it surfaced pretty soon. it is available is -- it is available publicly. this memorandum urged the business community to take up a forceful reaction to the attack on business that was going on in the 1960's. they said businessmen were being persecuted, the rate of profit is declining. we are under attack. the universities have been taken over by crazed radicals led by herbert marcuse a, who of course

nobody had ever heard of. the business world is under attack by ralph nader, who is demanding that automobiles have safety measures built in them. and moving for consumer rights and consumer safety and other domains. so it, the -- so, the business world cannot tolerate these attacks. it went on to say look, we have the resources, we have the money, we can fight back. we can refuse to accept this attack on our power and privilege. in fact, that resonated. that was part of the background which led to the neoliberal reaction of today. -- as quoted in earlier remarks were for the program, the

roughly $50 trillion robbery of the middle-class and working-class that has taken place in the past 40 years, since it started in the late quarter years and escalated under reagan and thatcher. and spread around the world, under u.s. power, structural adjustment programs which were imposed by the imf, which is under u.s. domination. which had a devastating effect on much of the global south. more than i can talk about now. but, going back to excess of democracy, that was the phrase from the trilateral commission report. which i did write about when it appeared, and have referred to sense. but, those two documents said a kind of -- set an ideological

framework. one from the liberal internationalists. another from the business run right-wing. they kind of set the frame in which, over the coming years, the neoliberal programs were developed. imposed. we have been living under that assault for 40 years. with pretty harsh effects. you're actually harsher effects in other countries. -- there are actually harsher effects in other countries. what actually happened in the late 1970's, there was what was called -- pretty high inflation in the united states. the carter administration

responded to it. with a very short rise in interest rates, which increased under the reagan years. well, during the 1970's, countries like mexico, other countries in the south had been urged by the world bank, the u.s. run world bank, they had been urged to take out extensive loans. >> . >> and citigroup conglomerate. and they were deeply inee debt. when the high interest rates were introduced the debt was linked to us interest rates

and they were in deep trouble and they had to take to the imf to impose conditionality is with cutbacks social spending development and other similar measures which devastated that had horrifying effects in much t of the heard world in yugoslavia which had more or less to be under the

impact of which intensified ethnic conflicts with the background for the horrors that took place in nearly nineties and the worst case was rwanda in the 1970s there had been significant conflicts mostly with randy my friend had written about in the 1970s and in the 1980s and rwanda was hit very hard and that society which is already very fragile collapsed in the conflict that existed that were intensified. i won't go into details but that's part of the background of those developments that took place a few years later in the 19 nineties and actions have consequences may be don't

anticipate that you should. that was the third world global self and the rich countries to be described by the way and corporation that is all part of the neoliberal reaction to the former period of whatt is called the regimented capitalism, the state capitalism based on new deal measures. it's worth remembering how far we have moved from those days and with eisenhower the less conservative president in the traditional sense of the word, conservative and eisenhower if you read his statements sounds like a flaming radical and eisenhower said any person who doesn't

accept the new deal measures of social welfare in the new deal and those that except in the political system and anyone who denies working people the right to unionize and affirm doesn't belong in the political system that was the 19 fifties and put some ears into the 1960s and then you get into the reaction which escalated under reagan and eisenhower with what you hear today. with the remnants and that tells us a lot of the past 40

years. >> let's getet collars involved starting with massachusetts please go ahead and ask your question. >>caller: thank you. thank you for your amazing career and continuing with presidentpr eisenhower and the famous statement with the emergence of the military-industrial complex. so we all have watched decades of grotesque spending on weapons but now we see a conflict in ukraine and drones and other kinds of drones and then the tiny micro weapons are able to take out the macro weapons of the tanks and the

naval ships. what do you make of this transition. >> thank you. it heralds a new era of warfare which is more dangerous and more threatening to everyone. and we mentioned before that we should be concerned constantly with what we can do and what we should do and one thing that we can do is send weapons. and f there is no argument for atforeign attack for a brutal

military force which has no mercy with the right to defend themselves so what is the goal to escalate the war the more ukrainians die? do we want to move towards a peaceful negotiated settlement? one of the most respected individuals in the us diplomatic corps. and respected properly with the individual record and then a couple of days ago came out and said the us policy seems to fight the rest of the last ukrainian.

. for the ukrainians, it is a death warrant. we have to come out with a proposal. we have to support, i should say, the proposals that are on the table and have been for a long time. for a settlement that offers putin some kind of escape, like it or not, that is a necessity. it will have to be based on neutralization of ukraine and

some kind of diplomatic arrangement for a degree of autonomy for the russian oriented areas. those things are on the table. the u.s. is not supporting them. the u.s. actually has an official policy, unfortunately, it does not seem to have been reported in the united states press. at least, i can find it. but, the policy is there. you can read it in government documents. i have quoted it repeatedly in things i have been writing. the policy was set in september, 2021. september 1, 2021. there was a joint statement of the u.s. and ukraine. this is months before the russian invasion. the document is basically a policy statement of the united

states, reiterating and amplifying the policy that had been in effect for many years. it is worth reading. first it says the door to ukrainian entry in to nato is wide open. we are inviting you to join nato. it says, the united states will intensify the sending of advanced military weapons to ukraine. it will continue with joint military efforts. in ukraine. it's called nato, but it means the u.s. ukrainian military operations. all of this placing weapons within ukraine, aimed at russia. all of this is part of the enhanced nato admissions program. you should really look at the exact wording, i am

paraphrasing. but, it is roughly that. well, that is a call for the horrors that have followed. it did not just start then. it has been going on for 28 years. you look back to the george h w bush administration. the first president bush. 1990, 1991. the soviet union was collapsing. there were intensive discussions with george bush, james baker, secretary of state, his russian counterpart mccalla gorbachev -- mikhail gorbachev.

the question was, what would be the shape of the post-cold war world with the soviet union collapsing? well, there were several visions. gorbachev's vision was what he called a common european home. from the atlantic, from lisbon all the way to vladivostok. no military blocs, mutual accommodation. this was an extension of a program of charles de gaulle in earlier years. that emmanuel macron has recently been pressing something similar, a common european home from the atlantic to the urals, incorporating russia within a

european and maybe eurasian, peaceful system with no military blocs. that was one vision. the other one, and disco spec 50 or 60 years, the u.s. vision called atlantis, based on the atlantic alliance, based on nato and europe, which the u.s. dominates and controls. that is a dip -- that is a deep issue in world affairs that goes back to the second world war. will europe be subordinate to the united states? within the atlantis nato framework? or, will it move towards a european common home and along the lines and with

what gorbachev proposes in 1990 but the us had no interest but it did have a compromise version that is what was agreed with michelle baker and the united states with gorbachev and russia and nato and germany would be unified and would join nato which is quite a concession a part of the russians because of their history and germany had practically destroyed russia several times in the past half-century to allow the unified germany to join in with the military alliance that was another small step in gorbachev agreed on the

condition that nato would not move 1 inch to the east beyond germany. and nato forces would even go to east germany. that was the condition. perfectly explicit and unambiguous if you want to see the actual wording, look it up on the online national security archives atge georgetown university which has the authoritative record of the official documents no ambiguity in gorbachev agreed that the bush baker administration adhered to it and clinton came in a couple years later and the first few years of the clinton administration he adhered to

the agreement but by 1994 with his eye on domestic politics and then to offer some hints of the eastern european countries joining nato and in 1997 and with his eye on the 1998. and with those borders to join nato and the president was very close to clinton to intervene to be elected in 1996 and then bitterly objected and so did gorbachev and every russian leader the us statesman and former

ambassador russia and reagan and henry kissinger numerous others pointing out to washington they are making a terrible mistake and that includes from william burns former cia director and william perry secretary of defense and was so outraged by this with specialist in russia writing a letter to say this is extremely dangerous. and then to become militant and aggressive and then in a

common european home and then clinton went ahead to george w. bush and later just tore it to shreds. and then to invite ukraine to join with germany and france. and all the people with a specialist. and to understand perfectly for russia there are definite redlines that no russian leader will tolerate hilton gorbachev that is ukraine and georgia with the geostrategic

heartland with hostile militaryos alliance. in september 2021 the policy statement amplifies it and stated explicitly. and we will continue to arm ukraine. and from what that looks like from the russian point of view to understandde by the statesman on this says this mexico were to join a chinese run military alliance to carry out the joint exercises of the chinese army to place weapons and mexico. we would not tolerate that for

one second. not anywhere in latin america. >> inconceivable. this is no infringement uncertainty of mexico. it cannot do what we just described. you cannot join the chinese run military alliance and those with the people's liberation army. and with the advanced weaponry from the chinese military experts placed weapons on the border of washington. and notice what i just

described in december 2021 us official policy on ukraine and russia. none of that justifies the russian aggression which is the crime that ranks with the us invasion of iraq with the hitler stalin invasion and with the supreme international crime of aggression. and nothing justifies that but to understand is not to justify. it is important if we care about ukrainians or even with world peace it could be easily

in a major conflict going on to a terminal nuclear war. but then to understand and to recognize understanding the people that i mentioned. and no longer with us. and by not joining today to develop diplomatic options for those that are already on the table. that was his point as long as

the position is you are finished. you are done. the war crimes trials. we are telling to ten saying we will fight you to the last ukrainian last that something we should be doing we should be moving towards peace we spent a lot of time talking about the weapons we can provide but the real thing we should be talking about is how can we move towards a peaceful settlement not to the last ukrainian. >> you are watching booktv on

c-span2 since his first appearance on the program has written dozens more books the next color from new jersey go ahead. >>caller: i am a great admirer of yours. i wondered about your thoughts of the recent locations with the amazon warehouse in staten island unionizing. and then to embolden the people throughout the country to unionize and recognize to take power c into their own hands. host: professor in case you did not understand talking

about amazon unionizing and is that a good sign? >> labor has been under bitter attack through the whole neoliberal period you may recall that the first action was to attack unions and call them scabs which are permanent replacement workers are bitter labor movement. margaret thatcher curing at the same programs and england is ain major attack on unions anday that opens the door to private corporations caterpillar launched into

union activities those that are nationally band. and that is change make labor organizing much harder. and then barely functions. with another major attack on labor. and was digitally attacked by the labor movement. but then north of an agreement but not this one. labor came forth with the proposal, the labor action committee with the free trade

agreement that congress research bureau which has since been disbanded but it existed then and then to come out with a proposal very similar to the labor memovement. and the efforts to build a high wage train system and clinton went through with the b corporate pay system low-wage and low growth was great for profits. will that was after that was later extended with those agreements that go into the

details to that bitter attack on the labor movement. and a couple of years after nafta and after nafta rules take a labor historian at cornell university under nafta rules took a study of the effect of nafta on union organizing. it turns out the effect along with the refusal of the egg government led to a very sharp reduction of union organizing. there was an effort at

organizing the business could put up a banner and then to call and workers and you go ahead with thee union organizing they did not intend to do it but the warning was enough a major industry developed there are now major industries what used to be called scientific methods and lots of techniques but it doesn't matter if you have a criminal state that does not enforce the law. the effective it over the years it is a sharp decline in the labor movement. at a time when workers want the union that unionization

declines every year. and then it declines under attack from thef state corporate program that is what it amounts to. it is a traumatic break despite the enormous advantages that corporate business system has been given from the state criminality despite the enormous advantages of his own workers from staten island and then to be under attack from amazon. and that is a small victory

there are a couple of others and there are some small signs and starting in nine unionize in reded states like my state like arizona and west virginia and teachers who areac not unionized and not just for higher wages but better conditions for children and then to defined the education and tried to destroy the public education system in the trump years we had a secretary of education who was openly committed to destroying the public education system it was one of the great achievements

of american democracy. and the united states pioneered and led the world in public education and an enormous contribution to democracy and for the grandson universities and then they enable the establishment and with the great state universities it was actually a land-grant university that was

an enormous contribution and has been under sharp attack quoting the price of democracy for more indoctrination with the attack on the educational system and the defending for state coalitions and universities that have sharply declined also the k k-12 level and toat destroy one of the major contributions in the united states towards democracy of corporate welfare and it still continuing so teachers began to strike west virginia and arizona for better funding for schools so a teacher doesn't have to sit in front of 50 kids there is

no resources they are fighting not just for better salaries which they deserve but also better conditions for children. they got a lot of support in arizona now and then the signs on businesses and then arizona passed a referendum calling for more funding for the schoolsd. and so the battle continues it is the major growth of labor organizing

that has extended the major labor movement and it's not heenormous but it has scattered victories that there is a long way to go for the nlrb to be reconstituted so it carries out the legal o responsibility of defending workers from illegal attacks which is devastated the labor movement. the biden administration has been trying to do it but it has been blocked 100 percent rocksolid republican opposition joined by a few right wing democrats who can't

get through very recently very good representatives to be prolabor and then there's a big battle to overcome and then to remember in the early 1930s and it was kind of similar the labor movement in the 1920s was crushed and the united states has a very violent labor history. much more send woodrow wilson and that impression to crush the vibrant militant movement in the 1920s there is almost nothing left and ine the early 1930s and then and then to

sitdown strikes and they got the new deal measures to greatly improve the lives of americans and with the postwar social democratic movements may be b they begin today but it will be a major battle. amazon victory for what could be done but it will be a long walk. so it continues right now relentless. and it will take plenty of dedication and commitment.

>> we have one hour left with our guest and we will continue to take your call. he has appeared on c-span 28 times. national reputation sprang forth in 1867 with the responsibility of intellectuals in the new york review of books and in 1989 giving a lecture on thought control in modern society and here's a portion. >> and with that necessary illusion and then to be paradoxical and birth control and one cannot have control a democratic society and there is a standard view about this

edmatter and it is expressed for example by supreme court justice powell who speaks of the societal purpose of the first amendment that enables the public with meaningful control. now he happens to be speaking about the media and the crucial role in similar marks could be made about the educational system and intellectual life generally but it's important for free access to information and therefore allowing the democratic m process to be in a meaningful way so the media would fulfill what "the new york times" on sunday called the traditional jeffersonian role and if one takes

jefferson seriously then presumably he would have gone further not just the counterbalance power but other concentrations of power with the kinds that developed in that period of corporate power which is the dominant feature. that seems obvious with the foundation of democracy but it is worth bearing in mind there is a contrary view and it's the dominant view it goes right back to the origins of modern democracy and at that time great concern was expressed over popular agitators of preachers and workers with their printing

presses and their pamphlets in public speeches that has a cloak of mystery behind which the parliament carrying out their struggle so now these people in their words wanted to be represented by men of their own kind on to observe their activities and one contemporary history and warned that review the workingsgs of power to make them so curious and arrogant they will never find humility which is a big problem so well after they were crushed then john locke wrote the tradesman must

be told what to believe in the greatest part they cannot now and then they must believe so these arose once again during the american revolution and it was not until the 1780s that the radical democrats were crushed and there is no more any thought anybody would be represented of man of their own quote sign that would be represented by those of whom they were permitted to make a selectionsy which follows the principle laid down by the founding father that that was

quoting john j. so all this comes to the present but that is expressing the same view in the modern version so he explained his words rationality belong to the cool observer but because of the average man is not reason that faith relying upon necessary illusion and emotionally potent oversimplification which has to be provided by the cool observers walter littman

talked about the manufacturers consent which has been a self-conscious art from government in a revolution of democracy and that is appropriate because the common interest alludes public opinion entirely and can be managed only by a specialized class and the same concerns explain a good deal of the fear of radical movements abroad so in the early 19th century the czar of russia was deeply concerned about the contagion of revolutionary ideas coming from american democracy which might undermine the conservative world order that they were presiding over and then the rules were reversed at the time when woodrow wilson sent

troops to go against the bolsheviks a secretary of state at the bolsheviks were quoting the proletariat to the ignorant and mentally deficient that by the very numbers are urged to become masters with the same ideas that appear explicitly in the public relations industry the patrons think of the modern public relations industry received his training and later developed the concept of engineering of consent and is something which he practiced in demonizing the capitalist government of guatemala working in the early fifties

paving the way for the cia to —- two. and then to describe the task as controlling the public mind educating the american people with the economic facts of life and a proper understanding of the common interests the public is the only serious danger confronting the company and an at&t executive commented years ago in the problems have been addressed ever since. there is also an academic with the social scientist one of the leading american political scientist major figure in communications wrote an interesting commentary in this

with the international encyclopedia of social sciences under propaganda those were more honest days and wrote an entry under propaganda which he explained we must not succumb about man being the best judgment of their own interest. they are not the elites must ensure that means to impose their will for the common good andn that means our whole new technique of control through propaganda and is necessary to do this because of the ignorance and superstition of the masses and then he explained why it's important it's not the case as the naïve might think to be inconsistent rather than the whole line of thinkers observed. the point is that in a

military state or a feudal state it doesn't much matter what people think because you have a bludgeon over there had controlling what they do in their behaviors you can control what they do but when the state loses in uk cannot control by force when the voice of the people can be heard you have a problem that makes people so curious and so arrogant and therefore you have to control the people think to ensure that they don't get out of control. >> that was 198-9128 appearances and has made over the years joining us now live from his home in tucson arizona and the next call from

him is michael from miami. >>caller: hello and thank you for your humanity and your scholarship. if you answer yes i believe because i'm calling you from broward county which is the school district that is under the most attack by a governor provide enough people who have not read. >> but what is your question? >> it has to do we had our governor say he wished to increase natural herd immunity in order what he viewed as a benefit but the very

definition for like herd immunity that is criminal eugenic genocide that is the equivalent. >> so covid herd immunity is the question from governor desantis in florida. >> it is about governor desantis and covid immunity? >> herd immunity. yes sir. >> and fortunately there is a powerful anti- vaccination movement in the united states and desantis has played a role. and those by serious health

officials. and this is seriously prolonging a significant crisis that 1 million americans will already die and the hospitals are overflowing with mostly in vaccinated patients. and of course to provide a future of my mutations have the means if not to eradicate to greatly control to diminish the harm on the coronavirus. and also to prevent and that

can be much more harmful. the means exist but it has to be followed. if not it will be more suffering and more pain and more death and many hospitals that literally had to suspend normal operations just because of the overflow of the largely in vaccinated patients filling up the covid wars. so there is a lot to do. >> and it's critically

important to get vaccination advanced in the larger regions ofot the world which is not had access to vaccines. and in the early part that tended to monopolize the vaccines for themselves. and it was worse than the us record. and then to raise through the monopolization and a large part of incidentally which goes back to the wto that is called free trade agreements but they are not free trade

and with those protectionist measures and with media corporations and others. and then to a overcharge and make extraordinary profits. and in the pharmaceutical industry with research and development. that they are in a vaccine. with those free-trade agreements but the effect has

been to deprive large portions of the vaccines that they need. and into the large pool of unvaccinated people. and those to you mutate as it does rapidly. and has been highly lethal but not very contagious or highly contagious and not very lethal we can't guarantee that will continue but the point is so what can we do? we can apply the means

available in terms of vaccination and protected spaces and to be safe from infection and those that ask many mechanisms that cansm be used to reduce the spread of infection and then to ameliorate the crisis and to largely overcome it to pursue those measures desantis does not have a good record on this. >> jim from california. >> it's a great honor to talk to you. >> basically the internet. your thoughts.

>> it hasn't been that long since it came into being thank you very much. host: what is the impact of the internet the last 25 years? >> it is quite a story i was actually present at the origin at the research level at mit which is where early ideas were formulated and it became that later turned into the internet. it's interesting and with

public funding and largely publicly achievement and later it wased privatized for profit but that was many years later into the night now the internet has become a major phenomenon. it is next consequences and does allow us to discover things that we otherwise would not have known and offers tremendous access to information and four years i've worked back to the article that you have mentioned and how the media operates as a kind of

combination and indoctrination system i used to have to go to the library and look at the microfilm machines from two years ago now i can do it by clicking a button you can find things you never would have found that was a crucially important document september 2021 us government policy statement from ukraine you can find on the internet that now you can pick it up from the official page on the

internet and that is a tremendous source of potential information and enlightenment i stress potential but it matters how you use it and unfortunatelyim it's often used to limit understanding and restrict information there is a natural tendency to torn on —- turn toward the internet site that reinforces your own physician i know i will hear the kinds of things that i like. i will turn to that so that the enforcement of doctrines and ideas those that are immune to it and if you're

getting reinforced that is a very widespread phenomenon and it is quite dangerous and it undermines the possibilities of interchange and interaction across society which are a prerequisite from a democratic society based on the informed viewsat of others and understanding t they are able to forward hence the basis because that's pretty much what it was like with the exciting new deal period it

was also's true over a very wide range at the time mostly younger population i was in my forties at the time. but this is deteriorating. and with that liberation and enlightenment it can be an instrument of control and indoctrination and divisiveness a breakdown of social order but a hammer doesn't care whether to build a house or torture to crush somebody's school.

and the internet ispl an example. >> coming in from el paso texas go ahead. >>caller: i change my question i was going to ask if the united nations could solve the problems in afghanistan and ukraine but now i am concerned if you think that economic sanctions are in active or? - - act of war quick.

>> it is worth remembering that is sanctions are carried out by the united nations most are carried out by the united states actually more than half of the world's population is now under another form of sanctions. is there no legal authority the united states is using sanctions wildly ton punish people sometimes is just an occasion at least one power.

and that is as capable of deciding who gets sanctioned. but cuba has been undirected contact by the united states so kennedy carried out a major terrorist war against cuba not much discussed here but it was real and very serious. and then sanctions were imposed. and then cuba faced very serious problems getting under the sanctions regime.

and then clinton outflanked the republicans from the right by increasing sanctions and torture. us sanctions or third-party sanctions have to adhere to us sanctions even if they oppose them and inn the case of cuba thgenetically they oppose strenuously they look at the annual votes in the united nations on the cuba sanctions and then the last vote was 184

/ two. and then how to follow us orders. and then does not even observe thete sanctions why do they observe us sanctions even though they oppose them because they are afraid of the united states europe opposes the sanctions vigorously but it has to go along because you cannot step on toes of the united states. it is dangerous in fact it has the capacity to throw countries out of the international financial system. nobody is willing to face that.

they cannot provide medical equipment to sell something that uses nickel imported from cuba. what's the reason? it is quite an open society more sowe than others. we have a lot of information with the government is doing. a lot of that is declassified. so look back at the kennedy and johnson administration in the sixties and ask why the torture of cuba? and i am quoting successful defiance of uss policies going

back to the 18 twenties to the monroe doctrine. and then to turn the hemisphere into a sphere of influence. back in the 18 twenties was powerful enough to implement. and overtime as predicted and then to impose the doctrine. and then of that demand to dominate the hemisphere. and then we have to torture

them. bitterly and brutally. and then the whole world joins end. and that is sanctions. there was an agreement on nuclear weapons. under the obama administration. and that completely lived up to the agreement. and then to develop nuclear systems and nuclear weapons

then president trump dismantled it and violating security council orders and they ordered that all countries maintain the jcpoa and then said we will tear it apart and then punished and ran for the violation of the security council orders. and to be bitterly opposed to that. and we have to conform and then to maintain the biden administration. had a chance to restore the agreement we can look through the rest of the world. sanctions but at least they

are legitimate. but thehe us sanctions have no legitimacy. and it is the west weapon. and then to look closely. and there are some that we have t extensive evidence to take the clinton administration, the sanctions from the 19 nineties. and they weree administered from the un and then to be

distinguishedip international diplomats who administer distinctions. and then to resign in protest speak says he said those were genocidal. and bitterly harming iraqi civilians in fact he is gaining and the population then to shoulder under the umbrella of the government so it strengthens the tyrant harming the population to the point where he resigned with

the diplomat and had researchers all over the country observing what was happening. and anybody in the west. because as he put it the sanctions are genocidal and reiterated and strengthened and also published an important book called the different kind of four with that brutality of the us british sanctions and what they were doing with the population while they were strengthening the tyrant.

and i think there is a single review in the united states or britain but you can find out in detail what sanctions are like with brutal and sadistic manners. because the sanctions may have saved saddam from being overthrown from within. that happened to a lot of tyrants through us backke terrence. and then haiti.

and then to be very strongly supported by the united states until the day it isft overthrown. and then they were toppled by internal referrals. the same thing happened in south korea and possibly it could have happened in iraq but not under the conditions of the sanctions that punish the population and demoralize them. and forcing them to shelter under the umbrella there is no possibility that is one case of sanctions where we can learn a great deal it is very detailed and instructive then

to accept the indoctrination and it doesn't matter because it's a free country and there are other cases but the usual discussion of sanctions do they achieve the end there is a lot of criticism of the iran sanction in the united states because they did not work or force iran to accept us q demand. is not thehe right question so what right does the united states have in violation of security council orders and then to punish iran because we destroy the agreement? that's the question that should be asked what right do we have to compel others to

punish iranians because we withdrew? those of the questions and they can be asked in other cases cuba is the obvious and ovenezuela but remember us sanctions are so widespread that is over half of the world's population and i quoted chas freeman is one of the highly regarded members of the diplomatic corps as ambassador and then to go into the illegality of the sanctions.

host: and in your book who rules the world there is a chapter but the us is a leading terrorist state we have five minutes leftat with our guest. >> have a feeling immigration only o get worse because of global warmingyt and now if it makes it better than we should turn them away it's not easy to leave their place are unfamiliar with but i don't know if you agree also that it will get worse because it's overwhelming and what we can do? >> can you repeat the essence? >> she is concerned about immigration and thinks it will get worse because of global climate change.

>> that's an interesting question. we don't have muchh time but looking at the us record on immigration that is an unusual position of extraordinary advantages very little population density ending norma's resources and empty spaces so history on immigration up until the 20th century immigrants were welcomed from europe then to open up for settlement and for those to come in and settle it. it was the oriental exclusion

but in 1924 the us imposed the first strict immigration restrictions. the words were not used by ineffective was aimed at italians and use with the effect in the design of immigration of 1924 and many jews ended up in the extermination camps with the united states including the remnants of my extended family. the loss stayed through 1965. other arrangements are made whicho are worth discussing.

and it's even more brutal with the immigration policies of the united states and europe has been centuries and now working hard to ensure that people are escaping from the wreckage of europeans so with those military installations to try to be sub-saharan africa from even making it to the mediterranean entering european shores of you want to feel good about it and the construction of their

societies and then those murderous tear operations killing thousands of people and then with honduras the military coup in 2009 and condemned accepted by obama and hillary clinton. and then turning honduras more than it had been into a huge wave of flight at the border and then to separate at the border under trump that is disgraceful.

and pope francis properly said the refugee crisis is not a refugee crisis it is a moral crisiswe that the equation question that now we are intensifying the danger of global warming which would be devastating leading to huge fight countries like bangladesh will be unlivable and most of south asia will become virtually unlivable large parts of africa so they will have to flee hundreds of millions trying to free. not so great here either.

that they will be shattered by this and yes there will be enormous immigration problems but the way to deal with it is toto a stop the assault on the global environment we are destroying the environment and with the scientific community and with that right away. and then with the fossil fuels. and then we are finished.

>> professor we have to ended there i went to close at this quick message speaking throughout the remarks and writing. he has two new books coming out this year. our guest for the past two hours. >> it was a great advantage to know what it was like. and also for a president very helpful.

>> i am very much the person that believes you should say what you mean and mean what you say and to feature first ladies it are

disappearing. >> host: well, it was in 2004 that victor davis hanson was first on this program. since that time he's written an additional seven books, so we invited him back to speak about those. his most recent book is called "the dying citizen," and, dr. hanson, in this book you write that, quote, history is not static. civilizations experience descents, detours and regressions and abrupt implosion. can you give us a sense of how you view our current