to stamp out just the cut outs of. engagement equals betrayal. when some find themselves well supplied we choose to look for common ground. on chomsky and my family at mit and i think. getting more headlines as a war activities for the last few years. noam chomsky has made to international reputation school wide as does one of the national leaders of american resistance to the vietnam war the d.p.

is a professor of linguistics who before he was 40 is wrote to transform the nature of his subject. you are identified with a new level whatever that is you certainly have been an activist as well as a writer. as the times. listed in anybody's catalogue among the. top girls of the new. the standard he achieved by adopting over the past 2 or 3 years a series of adamant. project at least american foreign policy. itself. but actually this notion. but an interesting one so she has to tell us. it was used in truth. so soon and see just. really is criticizing

barrels going to me or the corruption of the italian state and so on than a cold area $106.00 they were cold and $810.00 people would collapse in laughter in the streets of rome or milan. in totalitarian states the notion to use so in the old soviet union dissidents were called anti so via that was the worst condemnation. of the brazilian military dictatorship they were gold in any brazilian. no it's true that in just about every society the critics are maligned. were mistreated different ways depending on the nature of the society like in soviet union say would be imprisoned. in the us dependency like el salvador at the same time his counterparts have their brains blown out by a u.s. run state terrorist worse than others is it just condemned their villa from the

zone and in the united states or one of the terms of abuse is anti american and there's a couple of others like you know more cases there's an array of terms of abuse. of in the united states a very high degree of freedom and so if you're vilified by some commas or who cares to go on to your work anyway these concepts only arise in a culture where if you criticize state power and when i state i mean. we're generally not just government but state corporate power if you criticize concentrated power you're against the society you're against the people it's quite strict in there is used in the united states and i think for now the only democratic society with the concept isn't just ridicule and it's a sign of. elements of the elite and culture which are the right oblique.

the american dream my many ideals was partly symbolic but partly real so in the 1950 s. and sixty's it was a the biggest growth period in the. american economic history. gold paint. it was pretty gala tarion growth

so the lowest 5th of the population was improving about as much as the upper 5th. and there were some welfare state measures which improve life for much of the population it was for example possible for a. black worker to get a decent job in an auto plant. get a core of children go to school and so on and the same across the board. when the u.s. was. primarily a manufacturing center it had to be concerned with its own consumers here famously henry ford raised the salary of his workers who would be able to buy cars. when you're moving into it. international blue tongue army is the mancs like to

call it the live small percentage of the world's population that's gathering increasing wealth what happens to american consumers that have much less concern because most of them aren't going to be consuming your products anyway at least on a major basis. your goals or profit in next quarter even if it's based on financial manipulation and. high salary high bonuses produced overseas if you have to and produce for the a wealthy classes here and their counterparts abroad what about the rest well there's a term coming in to use for them to as they're called the precariat. precarious proletariat the working people of the world who live increasingly precarious lives . and it's related to the attitude toward the country altogether.

during the period of great growth of the economy fifty's and sixty's but in fact earlier taxes on the wealthy were far higher corporate taxes were much higher taxes on dividends are much higher simply taxes on wealthier much rare the tax system has been redesigned of so that the taxes that are paid by the very wealthy are reduced and cursed ponderingly the tax burden on the rest of the populations increased. now the shift is towards trying to keep taxes just done and wages and on consumption which everyone has to do not say and dividends which i go to the rich.

the numbers are pretty striking. now there's a pretext of course there's always a pretext the pretext in this case is well that increases investment and increases jobs but there isn't any evidence for that if you want to increase investment give money to the poor and the working people they have to keep alive so they spend their incomes and that stimulates production stimulates investment that leads to job growth and so. if you're an ideologist for the masters you have a different line and in fact right now it's almost absurd and corporations have money coming out of their pocket. so in fact general electric are paying 0 taxes and they have enormous profits let's take the profit somewhere else or go for it but not pay taxes and this is common. the major american corporations shift the burden of sustaining

a society on to the rest of the population. solidarity is quite dangerous from the point of view of the masters you're only supposed to care about yourself and not about other people this is quite different from the people they claim are their heroes like adam smith who based is whole approach to the economy on the principle that sympathy is a fundamental human trait but that has to be driven out of people's heads gotta be for yourself father while maxon don't care about others which is ok for the rich and powerful but is devastating for everyone else.

going to take a whole lot of effort to try to drive these basic human emotions out of people's heads. and we see it today in policy formation for example in the attack on social security. social security is based on a principle it's based on a principle of solidarity saw bury it in caring for others. a social security means i pay payroll taxes so that the widow across town can get something to live upon. much of the population that's what they survive. it's of no use to the very rich so therefore there's a concerted attempt to destroy it. and one of the ways is defunding it you want to destroy some system 1st the fund. then it will work people be angry they

want something else that's a standard technique for. privatizing some system. we see it in the attack on public schools and public schools are based on the principle of solidarity. i no longer have children in school they're grown up but the principle of solidarity says i happily pay taxes so that the kid across the street can go to school that's normal human emotion that it drives it out of people's heads i don't have kids in school why should i pay taxes privatized it so on. the public education system all the way from kindergarten to higher education is under severe attack i mean that's one of the jewels of americans say.

go back to the golden age again the great chris period in the fifty's and sixty's a lot of that is based on free public education. and one of the results of the 2nd world war was the g.i. bill right which enabled veterans remember that's a large part of the population and to go to college they would have been able to do otherwise of the century and free education where a community is date or nation regularly and best substantial share of it resources in education the investment invariably returned in better business and a higher standard of living us was way in the lead in developing. extensive mass public education at every level. but now more than half the states most of the funding for the colleges comes from 2 issues not from the state that's a radical change that's a terrible burden on students it means that students if they don't come from very

wealthy families they're going to leave college with big debt and fewer think dead you're trapped i mean maybe you want to become a look interest lawyer but you're going to have to go into a corporate law firm to pay off those dead by the time you're part of the culture you know you're not going to get out of it again and that's true cross the board. there's been.

says he stressed to make sure that the british present at the bill of budget at that. time. stopped russia was so you'll see then taste a tasty dish he's a cia which cut off shall. see death and now look what you've seen in the investments you check or a woman a man or shan't. want to talk to you so if you're my it's your bonus for c.b.s. to give. it to mr ellsworth supporter i'm still with them to spill over for this interview are you going to use that it's a studio actually the person the person who goes to revoke or should stop them spinning. expressed.

you know world of big partisan movies a lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that mainstream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the bath and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the truth the time is now for watching closely watching the hawks. in the 1950 s. is a much poorer society today than there were the us could easily handle centrally free

mass higher education today a much richer society clinton's dozen of the resources for. that said just what's going on right before our eyes and it's the a general attack on the principles that and that i mean not only are they humane they're the basis of the prosperity and health of this society. if you look over the history of regulation say the railroad regulation financial

regulation and so on and you find that quite commonly it's it's either initiated by the economic. concentrations that are being regulated or it's supported by them and the reason is because they know that sooner or later they can take over the regulators. and it ends up with what's called regulatory capture. the business being regulated is in fact running the regulators. bank lobbyists are actually writing the laws of financial regulation gets to that extreme. and that's been happening through history and again it's a pretty natural tendency when you just look at the distribution of power.

one of the things that expanded enormously in the 1970 s. is lobbying as the business world moved sharply to try to control legislation. business world was pretty upset by the advances in a public welfare in the sixty's and in particular by richard nixon and it's not too will understand that but he was the last new deal president and they regarded that as class treachery. and nixon's administration you get the consumer safety legislation safety and health regulations in the workplace the e.p.a. the environmental protection agency. business didn't like it of course they didn't like that taxes. they didn't like the regulation and they began a coordinated effort to try to overcome it. lobbying sharply increase deregulation began with the rule ferocity. there were no financial crashes in the fifty's and the sixty's because the regulatory apparatus of the new deal was still in place

. as a pm to be dismantled under business pressure and political pressure. to get more and more pressures. and it goes on through the years. seventy's sort of starts begin. eighty's really takes off congress was asked to approve federal loan guarantees to the auto companies about the want and want to have a $1000000000.00 and all of this is quite safe as long as you know the government's going to come to your rescue so take say reagan instead of letting them pay the cost break and build out the banks like continental the biggest bailout of american history at the time that she ended his term with so the huge financial crisis the savings and loan crisis and the government moved in and build it out for

a kind of $300.00 for a very fair lady they are going to be $99.00 regulation with us dismantled to separate commercial banks from investment banks. and then come see bush and obama bill and bear stearns is running to the feds to stay afloat president bush today defended the decision to bear out citi group that in may and freddie macin ask for a total at green $1000000.00 more to sail out could get much bigger are they willing even in troubles for the u.s. economy. and they're building up the next term. b. each time the taxpayer is called on to bail out of those who created the crisis

increasingly the major financial institutions. in a capitalist economy you would do that in a capitalist system that would worry about the investors who made risky investments but the rich and powerful they don't want a capitalist system they want to be able to run to the nanny state as soon as they're in trouble and get billed a taxpayer it's called the too big to fail. i mean there are no will or it's an economics who significantly disagree with the course that we're following people like just stiglitz paul krugman others none of them were even approached the people picked to fix the crisis were those who created the robert rubin crowd the goldman sachs croak they created the crisis are no more powerful than before is that accident well not when you pick those people to create an economic plan and then what do you expect to happen. meanwhile for the poor

let market principles prevail don't expect any help from the government the government's the problem not the solution and so on that's essentially neo liberalism and it's has this dual character which goes right back in economic history one set of rules for the rich office etc rules for the poor. and nothing surprising about this exactly the dynamics you expect if the population allows it to proceed she's going to go on and on like this until the next crash which is so much expected that credit agencies which kind of evaluate the. status of firms are now counting into their calculations the taxpayer bailout that they expect to come in after the next crash which means that the beneficiaries of these credit ratings like the big banks they can borrow money more cheaply they can push

out smaller competitors and you get more and more concentration everywhere you look policies are done this way which should come as absolutely no surprise to anyone that's what happens when you put power into the hands of a narrow sector of will which will is dedicated to increasing power for itself just as you'd expect. be. a. concentration of wealth yields concentration of political power. particularly so as the cost of elections skyrockets which kind of forces the political parties into the pockets of major corporations. the citizens united this was january 2009 i guess that's

a very important decisions prim court decision but it has a history and you got to think about the history. of 14th amendment has a provision that says no person's rights can be infringed without due process of law. and the intent clearly was to protect freed slaves said ok they've got the protection of the law i don't think it's ever been used for freed slaves if ever marginally almost immediately it was used for businesses corporations their rights can't be infringed without due process of law so they gradually became persons under the law. corporations or state created legal fictions. maybe they're good maybe they're bed but to call them persons is kind of rages so they get got

personal rights back about a century ago and that extended through the 20th century. as they give corporations rights way beyond what persons have so if say general motors invests in mexico they get national rights the rights of the mexican business well the notion of person was expanded to include corporations it was also restricted if you take the 14th amendment literally that no undocumented alien can be deprived of rights if they're persons. undocumented aliens who are living here and building your buildings clear lawns and so on they're not persons. but general electric is a person. an immortal a super powerful person this perversion of the young elementary morality and the obvious meaning of the law is quite incredible. in the

1970 s. the courts decided that money is a form of speech. but the 1st value and then you one through the years to citizens united which says that the right of free speech of corporations namely spend as much money they want can't be curtailed. take a look what that means it means that corporations which anyway have been pretty much buying elections are now free to do it with virtually no constraint as tremendous attack on the residue of democracy. very interesting to read the rulings like justice kennedy's swing vote his ruling said well look after all the c.p.s. is given freedom of speech there are corp why shouldn't general electric be free to spend as much when he's that one. i mean it's true that c.b.s.

has given freedom of speech but they're supposed to be performing a public service that's why that's what the press is supposed to be a general electorate is trying to make money for the chief executive some of the shareholders. sitting critical decisions and it puts the country in a position where business power is greatly extended beyond what it always was this is part of that vicious cycle the supreme court justices are put in by reactionary presidents who get in there because they're funded by business and that's the way the cycle works. wordpress you know so many people referenced the marie antoinette let them eat cake and then you know historians have gone back and they said you know it's actually my cake and brioche brioche you know that so i brought in actually my god what

a mess we brought in actual brioche this is a brioche just a slice there at the patisserie and so this is what she suggested that the peasants this should be eating because they run out of d.c. this is a brioche is a slightly nicer version of that there's a few in the cupboard let's throw that to the peasants and maybe that'll shut them up but. i. ready ready ready am sure to stop at the continuing to grow. i just never know very good about the idea of bringing shoulder room into the world because i didn't feel like things were in very good shape that a life was just going to be

a lot of software programs. there's no reason we're more kids you take things that are to me the. movies on the move something else that. everybody's scared to talk about in survival is truly dependent on us addressing this issue and if we can even talk about it if we can even have a conversation of that it then. we're in trouble. ready when else seemed wrong. when old just don't hold. any of these yet to shape our. just to become educated and engaged equals betrayal. when some find themselves worlds apart we choose to look for common ground.

in the headlines this morning the united states could potentially be smuggling tons of weapons and ammunition to militants in syria according to leaked documents obtained by. entering a new phase around though says it will set aside limits on nuclear research and development into the 2050 nuclear deal unless european states to save record. the british prime minister get a major blow as m.p.'s possibile to block a no deal departure from the e.u. legislation that's expected to be made law on friday. the u.n. report highlights the potential role of the us britain and france and he was rights violations committed in yemen.